panelarrow

Angry Atheist Hates “Sudden Death” Posts!

| 129 Comments

I recently banned an atheist from my blog for excessively rude and nasty language. He contacted me via my personal email and you can read it below. Following is my gracious response and condition for restoration which I hope he accepts.

You can censor me from your blog. Big deal. You’re still scum. You’re still a ghoul. You’re still a member of a death cult. You care nothing about that boy and its toll on his family. You only care about reinforcing your own beliefs and your twisted theology. It’s that simple. And I know what they are going through. I just hope none of them had to read your vile [vile curse word deleted]. You and [Ray] Comfort and [Tony] Miano are the same. You all disgust me.

“Lester Ballard” AKA Rufustfirefly

And here’s my response to Lester/Rufustfirefly:

Thanks for your response. I’m sorry that you are so angry with my Sudden Death posts. Death is a sad, sad reality. If I can just cause one person to think of their own mortality and the eternity that awaits them, then I will have been successful in my posts. Death, especially the death of a young boy is tragic. All death is horrendous and awful. Given the state of our American society, we are numbed by the tragic. Movies, TV, the daily news— all that violence and tragedy—compounds our hardness of heart to the reality that we have a short time on this earth. If it takes a simple weekly post like Sudden Death to move you, I’m glad. I’ve done my job.

You may continue to respond in the comments at Stone The Preacher after you apologize.

Until then, I wish you well! And I mean that.

Yours ever heartily,

Pastor Steve

Wait! There’s another reason for Sudden Death Mondays! Click here to read it.

129 Comments

  1. “Movies, TV, the daily news— all that violence and tragedy—compounds our hardness of heart to the reality that we have a short time on this earth.”

    1 – I don’t understand how you think you’re combating the overexposure of violence and tragedy by giving more exposure to violence and tragedy.

    2 – Has this actually ever worked? Has a non-already-converted real Christian ever taken a look at these posts and think, “Whoa. That insanely unlikely way to die could’ve happened to me. Better get right with God today.” Or is it one of those things you believe must happen, therefore it must happen. (Because belief trumps experience and evidence every time.)

    3 – Is anyone really surprised to find out that they’re going to die someday?

    • perdita,

      1 Steve isn’t gratuitously using violence or tragedy like a television crime drama.

      2 Steve is a pastor. His job is to spread the Gospel. If he thinks that some of his posts will save even one person, like most pastors, he is going to try. What Steve is doing is being a fisher of men. Different people take different bait.

      3 I think some people try very hard to not think about death. If you found out that someone got killed in an automobile accident on some stretch of road or corner that you drove on… wouldn’t you maybe drive a little more carefully? I think Sudden Death Mondays are meant to remind people to take a second and think about their lives and what road they are on.

      • Rather than retype everything:

        1 I didn’t say he was. I said he was exploiting real people’s very real lives for his own purposes.

        2 Well, since it’s the Holy Spirit that does the saving, Steve could choose to show compassion to the friends and families involved and find a different way to remind us all of our mortality.

        3 This is just… really naive. You seem to think it’s uncommon to be driving on roads were people were killed. You seem to think death is something that happens to other people. carl, why would I need to think of strangers in order to think about death?

        Maybe you’ve never lost someone close to you. Maybe you’ve never been in a situation where you almost lost your life. And maybe that’s why you’re so fascinated by the death of others and can blithely go on about, “you know not the day the hour are you ready.”

      • perdita,

        The last paragraph of your response to me… isn’t that what Nohm calls failed mind reading?

        Is having a convesation with an atheist just a no win situation for a believer?

      • Is having a convesation with an atheist just a no win situation for a believer?

        Apparently it’s a no-win for the non-believer, too. Where do you get that I was telling you what you think or feel? ‘You seem to think this’ is not the same as ‘You think this and I won’t listen to anything you tell me that contradicts me.’ Your comment came across as naive, as if…

      • Carl,

        It’s failed mind-reading if you think that it does not represent you at all.

        I agree that it’s not the way I would have phrased it (i.e., I would have phrased it as questions, instead of “maybes”), but at the same time I’ve talked with Perdita quite a bit and I don’t think she’d mind at all if you’d explain how she was incorrect, and what your actual opinions are.

        If you found out that someone got killed in an automobile accident on some stretch of road or corner that you drove on… wouldn’t you maybe drive a little more carefully?

        Like Perdita, I’m confused as to why you’d think I would do this, simply because someone got in an accident.

        I think Sudden Death Mondays are meant to remind people to take a second and think about their lives and what road they are on.

        I certainly agree that I think that’s part of what they are meant to do. My issue is that I don’t see any reason to think that they ever accomplish that goal.

      • carl, my last response to you was churlish. Sorry, just a bit tired.

      • perdita,

        After some very intense crying, nay sobbing… I am fine.

        😛

    • Hey Perdita,

      I’d like to ask you a question about your #3: Have you ever been surprised that someone you knew died? (If you’re over 18, I am sure you have) Why were you surprised?

      That’s what Steve is getting at.

      • I really don’t understand your question. Are you asking have I ever lost someone suddenly? I’m not sure how ‘surprised’ comes into it.

      • I too am a bit confused by the question. Yes, there have been people in my life who died without any notice, but I wouldn’t call my reaction to it as “surprised”.

        I’ve noticed, in my life, that I have quite a different view of death than other people that I know. Therefore, it’s quite likely that I have a very different view of death than you do, which could lead to my confusion regarding the way you’ve framed your question.

        For the record, my response to Carl’s #3 question would be similar to Perdita’s answer.

      • Glenn? Any response?

  2. I agree with what perdita has said. Also, if it’s a personal e-mail, then it should remain personal. Publishing e-mails of someone when it wasn’t intended to be public is quite rude, in my opinion.

    • Is there such a thing as a public email. Work email? I think Steve meant personal as opposed to maybe his work email.

      An email is an email. I don’t see why Steve is obligated not to share something someone sent to him, unless Steve made some sort of promise not to do so.

      My advice is to not send emails or personal information to someone under the assumption that a third party won’t ever see it.

  3. Steve,

    I find it sickening that somebody expresses genuine heartfelt anger at your using horrifying tragedies to push an agenda, and you respond in an immature passive aggressive manner. Publishing his real name? Asking for an apology? You know Rufus isn’t going to apologise, because he has nothing to apologise for. He was angry at you for a reason, Steve, and you asking for an apology is asking him to pretend that reason didn’t exist. He can’t do that.

    I’m fairly certain your mind will twist my words, and you’ll think that Rufus’ reason for being angry is something stupid like “atheists hate God”. It’s not, Steve. It’s really not.

    I am deathly serious when I say that whether or not he is willing to accept it (I wouldn’t be, were I him) it’s you who owes Rufus an apology, Steve.

    • BTW, Rufus isn’t his real name. (But I think you know that.) I wouldn’t publish his real name.

      • I’m aware that Rufus isn’t his real name. I’m also aware that “Lester Ballard” isn’t his real name. I did not, however, believe that you were aware of the latter, hence my comment. My apologies if you were.

        The rest of my comments still stand unanswered.

      • Actually, you can Google Rufustfirefly to get his meaning and Lester is a snark against Christianity. I believe he also went by Latka Gravas, too. If you are a “Taxi” fan you know who he is.

        He emailed me with his real name. Out of respect for his anonymity, I chose not to use it. I will never reveal who you guys really are if you send me personal emails, but will only refer to your nom de plumes.

        I’m hoping we can enjoy our friendly banter here. 🙂

      • Steve wrote: Actually, you can Google Rufustfirefly to get his meaning and Lester is a snark against Christianity. I believe he also went by Latka Gravas, too. If you are a “Taxi” fan you know who he is.

        Add Hayzoose to the list of rufustfirefly’s troll aliases.

  4. I’m sorry that you are so angry with my Sudden Death posts.

    Do you actually understand why they’re upset? You’re disregarding the real hurt and pain of what these families are going through. You do give it lip-service. But I can’t help but feel that if you truly had real compassion for the families and friends of your Sudden Death examples, you wouldn’t be posting about them.

  5. perdita says:
    “Has this actually ever worked? Has a non-already-converted real Christian ever taken a look at these posts and think, ‘Whoa.'”

    Let’s find out; “You know not the day or the hour.” Are you ready?

    • Then, “no, it’s never worked.” Thanks for clarifying.

      • Thanks for the clarification, perdita.

        I’ll keep trying.

      • On me? Sudden Death will never work on me. I find this fixation on strange and horrible deaths to be pretty creepy and I’m appalled by what I consider to be hardheartedness towards other people’s tragedies.

        I’m quite aware of my own mortality, thank you. What you need to prove* is that there’s some sort of after-life and judgment.

        And these posts don’t show that. These posts just show that death happens. Yeah, we know that. It’s one of the rare things we all agree on. Even Christians with supereverlastinglifeinheaven will die.

        (*you or the Holy Spirit – it really doesn’t matter who does it, but judgment after death needs to be shown to be true and not just asserted. Afterall, talk is cheap.)

    • Let’s find out; “You know not the day or the hour.” Are you ready?”

      Assuming I understand what you mean, no, I am not ready.

      But, more importantly, I don’t see any reason to believe as you do.

    • Let’s find out; “You know not the day or the hour.” Are you ready?

      Assuming I understand what you mean, no, I am not ready.

      But, more importantly, I don’t see any reason to believe as you do.

    • Jim why do you keep using lame and flawed reasons… not to believe the Gospel?

    • Carl wrote:

      Jim why do you keep using lame and flawed reasons… not to believe the Gospel?

      To me, Carl, the bigger question is this: Why should I believe the Gospel?

    • Carl? Any response?

  6. Pingback: Angry Atheist Hates “Sudden Death” Posts! « Stone the Preacher | Christians Following Jesus

  7. It’s rather interesting… Not one believer has taken issue with any of these Sudden Death posts. Not one. I just happen to be reporting news, not exploiting it. But even if I were, it’s for your sake, unbelievers; it’s for your sake.

    As Charles Spurgeon once wrote: “To be laughed at is no great hardship to me. I can delight in scoffs and jeers. Caricatures, lampoons, and slanders are my glory. But that you should turn from your own mercy, this is my sorrow. Spit on me, but, oh, repent! Laugh at me, but, oh, believe in my Master! Make my body as the dirt of the streets, but damn not your own souls!”

    That, too, is my sentiment.

    Perhaps it is because you fear death that you rail so against these posts. And no wonder when one considers the fearful eternity that awaits you.

    I remember how the atheists howled when Ray wrote about the death of an atheist he spoke with who died in a bicycle accident and used it as a platform to talk about the death of Jack La Lanne here.

    Here’s the video of that atheist who thought he had 20 more years to live yet died shortly after this interview with Ray Comfort (go to the 3:05 mark). http://youtu.be/F30lT5cflTw

    This is what some atheists wrote: “Do you ever miss a chance to use a tragedy as an excuse to proselytize? It is rather unbecoming to mine the grief and pain of others looking for material for a sermon.”

    “Nice morbid picture of the bicycle. Why didn’t you just get his autopsy photos and post it on here. That would be much better for your fear-mongering preaching style.”

    I’m sure it’s your consciences that are condemning you. Each day draws you closer to Judgment and Hell. Yep. I would hate these posts as well if I were in your shoes.

    Repent and believe the Gospel.

    • I just happen to be reporting news, not exploiting it.

      No. You just happen to be exploiting personal tragedies to further your agenda.

      But even if I were, it’s for your sake, unbelievers; it’s for your sake.

      1 – This is what you tell yourself because you don’t want us to have a point.
      2 – The ends justify the means? Where does that stop? Seriously, this is how liars for Jesus are made.

      Not one believer has taken issue with any of these Sudden Death posts. Not one.

      A couple of possibilities:

      1 – Your brethren are are just as numbed to real tragedy as you are.
      2 – These posts are more about bolstering your own faith in your salvation then about warning others.

      I’m sure it’s your consciences that are condemning you. Each day draws you closer to Judgment and Hell.

      No. It’s more that we can empathize with the friends and families of the people you’ve used in these posts. Maybe we’ve been touched by horrible tragedy or have encountered those that have and realize how insulting and callous it is to use a person in this way.

      • Very well put. Steve, perdita is right. You must stop using legitimately sad and disturbing personal tragedies to bolster your personal agenda.

  8. Oh, Jim. You are wrong. He does believe in “my” God now. And you will, too, someday. I sure hope it is on this side of eternity.

    • Now Steve you know that’s not true. Neither he nor anyone else will ever believe that your ego is God. You are an ego worshipper after all aren’t you Steve?

      Because of your ego worship you believe that you cannot be mistaken. Isn’t that right Steve?

    • Huh? Who said he doesn’t believe? I don’t know to who you are referring, Jim.

    • Tsk tsk Steve. Lying’s a sin. Want proof? Ok.

      Can you ever be wrong about scripture? Yes or no.

      If no then what else are we dealing with than an ego worshipper who claims to be infallible?

  9. I don’t fear death at all. I am concerned about how I will die though. Nope. I’m assured of where I’m going.

    And I won’t have to blog anymore, that’s for sure… 🙂

  10. Steve wrote “I’m assured of where I’m going.” Is that because your ego tells you so?

    Let me ask you this question Steve old son. If you could help someone who’s relative had died but you couldn’t mention your faith at all would you even bother trying to help?

    • Steve wrote “I’m assured of where I’m going.” Is that because your ego tells you so?

      No. The bible tells me so. Also, it says that Jesus loves me.

      Let me ask you this question Steve old son. If you could help someone who’s relative had died but you couldn’t mention your faith at all would you even bother trying to help?

      Of course. That’s called love. If you read your Bible, you, too, will know what love is.

    • When I wrote “The bible tells me so. Also, it says that Jesus loves me.”

      That’s the bible as interpreted by who Steve? That’s right you little old ego worshipper you. It’s the bible as interpreted by Steve.

      I asked “If you could help someone who’s relative had died but you couldn’t mention your faith at all would you even bother trying to help?”

      Steve replied “Of course. That’s called love. If you read your Bible, you, too, will know what love is.”

      Then considering that the families and friends of the people who have died may well be on the internet, time to put the principle into practice and NOT have anymore sudden death articles. Let’s see if you answered truthfully or if you’ll make an excuse to keep exploiting people’s deaths.

  11. Interesting that this rufustfirefly person chose the nickname “Lester Ballard.” Does rufustfirefly self identify with this character? If he does he needs to seek Jesus and seek some help. Just sayin.

    Leonard B is praying for you rufustfirefly.

  12. “Angry Atheist”

    Angry…Atheist…

    Now that is a textbook example of a tautology.

    🙂

  13. Angry Atheist Hates “Sudden Death” Posts!

    I find it ironic that rufustfirefly from wearesmrt is the “Angry Atheist” since he recently made death threats to somebody in the wearesmrt chatroom. I don’t know who was worse, rufustfirefly or the person he threatened.

    • Try giving the full story friend. Or are you content with half truths?

      • Chris,

        You seem to be indicating that there is a larger story here. Please ellaborate.

        Where is the thread? I’m sure there is a thread.

      • Carl
        Ask rufus himself what was said. I cannot go into detail without his permission and I will not do so since I consider him both a decent human being and a friend.

        Given what occured however I am not surprised the troll was banned. He is the first person, to my knowledge, who has been banned from SMRT, but deservedly so.

      • Chris I dont’ know rufus personally. So aside from going to the chat room which I’m pretty sure Christians are still not very welcome, I don’t know how I would ask him.

        Some time ago I did come into the chat room and I got a rather unfriendly welcome because I said I was a Christian.

      • Carl wrote:

        Some time ago I did come into the chat room and I got a rather unfriendly welcome because I said I was a Christian.

        Now, in all honesty, would you admit that not all people gave you an unfriendly welcome? Would you admit that it was specific individuals?

        This is my real annoyance; instead of having an issue with specific individuals, people will blame with a broad brush. I do not agree with the way that some of the chat regulars treat Christians. Having said that, I believe strongly in individual freedom, and therefore that’s what those people do, and I do things differently.

        It’s reasons like this that Chris asks you to give the full story.

        Christians are welcomed by some people in the chatroom, and not by others. That’s part of the “full story” that I don’t think you’re giving here, Carl.

      • Hear, hear Nohm.
        I’ve known plenty of Christians who were liars and theives. Are we to assume that since some Christians are like that then they all are?

        Now you could reply “oh but those aren’t true Christians”. Then I would be entitled to say “well since those Christians I encountered weren’t true Christians then that means that all Christians are false Christians.

        Sound reasonable? It’s generalising from a small sample. Never a good idea.

        Now as to your question carl since you don’t want to venture into chat why don’t you start a thread over at SMRT and ask rufus to tell you what happened?

      • Nohm,

        Nohm you said, “It’s reasons like this that Chris asks you to give the full story.

        Christians are welcomed by some people in the chatroom, and not by others. That’s part of the “full story” that I don’t think you’re giving here, Carl.”

        Thanks for your response. I don’t want to go into details and start calling people out and then become the objects of their angst. A couple people were rude and I was like whatever. At the end of the day that is their chat room and I was just visiting. I wouldn’t have minded talking to a couple people in more detail, like you for instance, but it is what it is.

        *Important Point: Chris wasn’t asking me to give the full story (see March 5, 2:27 pm above), I was asking Chris to fill in the details (see March 5, 5:14 pm). Chris was asking chat lurker to give the full story. I want to make that point clear. I hope you aren’t implying that I am chat lurker. I am not.

        I’m nosy. I just wanted to hear the story.

    • chatroom lurker – “I find it ironic that rufustfirefly from wearesmrt is the “Angry Atheist” since he recently made death threats to somebody in the wearesmrt chatroom. I don’t know who was worse, rufustfirefly or the person he threatened.”

      chatroom Lurker I find your comment interesting, especially the last sentence,

      “I don’t know who was worse, rufustfirefly or the person he threatened”

      I lurk sometimes too. I think rufustfirefly threatened himself. Rufustfirefly likes to use the “Guest” moniker to play head games with his smrtian friends and Christian “guests”. I have seen this. I read the exchanges between rufustfirefly and a guest. Both rufustfirefly and the guest typed and talked pretty much the same way. Rufustfirefly is good at making sockpuppets but not that good. I think rufustfirefly created the guest sockpuppet so he could bring attention to himself, so he could get some laughs at attacking some smrtians he doesn’t particularly like, so he can make himself look tough by making threats and finally to make himself look like a victim and get sympathy from the smartians. I think rufustfirefly’s guest game was very imaginative but he should have left out all of the profanity and talk about some picture that apparently only wearesmrt members could have looked at.

      I felt compelled to write all of this because I think rufustfirefly isn’t really angry. He is just playing like he is angry. He likes to get under the skin of people he doesn’t like. That is my opinion.

      • Wow! Now I’m interested too.

      • So much drama. It sounds like a soap opera. It is too bad that the title “One Life To Live” is already taken. It would be the perfect name for an atheist day time drama.

        😛

      • Those are some wild claims that go against what I know.

        Any evidence for any of this?

      • Of course not, you know they hate to present evidence when it’s asked for.

      • “I am a lurker 2” what you wrote actually makes a lot of sense.

      • Hi Nohm,

        What is the story?

      • Carl,

        The story is that claims like “I think rufustfirefly threatened himself. ” are evidence-free paranoid conspiracy-theorist silliness.

        As for the rest of the story, I don’t think that this is the appropriate forum to go into it all.

        In short, I think this was a situation where both people were in the wrong, but that the troll started it. Therefore, the troll got banned. That’s the end of it, for me.

        To claim that it was Rufus doing it to himself is offensive garbage.

      • I didn’t see your response to my question Nohm. Sorry.

        The story above… I dont’ know what to think. Bizarre yes, impossible no. It sounds like something from a soap opera. Lol.

        On a side note, do any conspiracy theories have any real evidence?

      • Carl wrote:

        On a side note, do any conspiracy theories have any real evidence?

        Sure, some have, but I think you’ll notice in those cases that the evidence came first, and then came the conspiracy theory; what I see here (and elsewhere) when conspiracy theorists talk/write is that they put the cart in front of the horse (i.e., first comes the theory, and then they look for evidence to support it).

        One example was Watergate. That was a conspiracy, but the evidence came first, and then the investigation began. Another example off the top of my head was Operation Snow White by the Scientologists. Again, first came the evidence, and then came the conspiracy theory.

        I get annoyed by this current conspiracy theory regarding rufus because absolutely no evidence has been presented. Just willy-nilly claims that make no sense. Like most conspiracy theories, it relies on the subject (rufus, in this case) to be both a master villain and a complete idiot at the same time. The “9/11 truther movement” relies on the same thing re: former President GW Bush (i.e., he and his “minions” were clever enough to set up this whole ruse without anyone knowing, but they were stupid enough to not think of hiding a WMD in a desert the size of a country).

    • Can we stop gossiping about a person who can no longer post here?

      • Here, here Perdita.

        Considering the gentleman concerned cannot respond can we can discussion concerning him and get back to Steve. He can respond. 🙂

      • Chris are you serious? You think rufustfirefly is a gentleman? He uses profanity, he is rude, he makes death threats, he posts disgusting images, he makes slanderous remarks about Ray Comfort, Tony Miano and Steve Sanchez and all Christians.

        Please define what being a gentleman means to you?

      • “chatroom lurker” (if that IS your real name), I’m more curious as to what *you* think makes a gentleman.

        And what’s this whole thing with using profanity? Have you never actually read or heard those words before? You must really be offended by my posts, then; I swear like a sailor when I’m not on Steve’s blog.

    • Yes, for a week or two solid we had an anonymous guest constantly spew out graphically profane spam ruining our chat, all day, every day. That spammer pissed a lot of people off.

      No it wasn’t rufus, we had the guys ip number and we were eventually able to ban him from the chat.

      For all we know you are that spammer here just to stir things up. I mean there’s no other reason to come here and suddenly accuse Rufus of being the spammer, particularly when we all know it wasn’t.

      I will note that once again we have blatant sock puppets posting under multiple names, refusing to respect Steve’s wishes. They held off for what, 1 week?

  14. As far as Steve’s obsession with death posts I think the truth is far more prosaic. I think Steve writes these types of posts so many times because his thoughts are dominated by death.

    In NA and AA they’s tell you Steve that you are an addict who’s found another addiction.

    Now of course Steve will defend his addiction because that what addicts do. To them the addiction is the answer, not the problem. In reality they are using the addiction to run away from their problems.

    Deal with your problems Steve. Don’t run from them. You’ll feel better when you do and you’ll find your obsession with death will slowly disappear.

    • Chris I think your comment to Steve is a low blow and very callous. I guess you don’t have any empathy.

      • Tammy I unreservedly apologise to both you and Steve if either of you were offended. What I was addressing was how addicts behave. Addiction is a disease. Alcoholism is a disease. No more morally reprehensible than the flu but a lot more life threatening.

        I was a child of an alcoholic. I spent several years in Al-Anon [that’s an organisation for family and friends of alcoholics].
        What I learned was this: You do not help alcoholics or drug addicts by helping them ignore their problem. That’s called denial and it is one of the reasons both find recovery so difficult.

        What needs to be done in both cases, as I suggested, is for an aloholic or drug addict to face their problems and take responsibility for their behaviour.

        What many addicts and alcoholics end up doing instead is just replacing one addiction with another. It may be an improvement as far as their health is concerned but it’s still an addiction. What AA calls “having the isms”.

  15. Steve, you a disgusting grandstander. Please, stop posting about “sudden death”, also I would think you as a moral God-fearing Christian would have better sense than to post someones personal email to you.

    Grow up and stop trying to be Ray Comfort. YOU ARE NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Steve did absolutely nothing wrong in posting the contents of an email sent to him. When you send or give something to someone that makes it their own property to do with it as they please.

      If you don’t want someone to do something then the proper thing to do is to ask them, politely, not to do it.

      Like someone’s wise grandma once said, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”

      • That must be why given the chance all the Christians flee from any discussion as soon as possible. Leaving behind only snarky condescending jokes to demonstrate to us Christs Love.

      • Jim,

        I have never heard of that. So anytime I cc someone or pass on an email I am breaking some sort of law and can be sued? I would like to know where you are getting that intel from.

    • “Really?” aka Shadowmouse is upset that the truth is coming out about her buddy rufus.

      The truth must be coming out because they are so upset about it.

      • May I suggest that “chatroom lurker”, “Lurker 2” and any other sockpuppets this guy has be asked to discontinue his actions or be banned from your site.

        Otherwise you will find that he will attack first one poster, then another until there is no one left to post on your blog except yourself and one very hate-filled troll who gains great delight in verbally abusing others.

      • I will do that Chris.

        Please, use one name or I will not allow your comments.

      • Steve Chris doesn’t care anything about your blog. BathTub too. Chris and BathTub are acting like a concern trolls and trying to tell you how to run your own blog. I think their advice and his concern are completely insincere.

        They don’t like to read what I am writing because it is the truth and it is showing people what some of the atheists are all about. They are not the victims they are the perpetrators. Some of these atheists would love to see Ray, Tony and your website go away and they are conspiring on ways to do that. Go to wearesmrt and read the Living Waters topic for evidence.

        For the record I am not the “troll” they banned from their blog. Any atheist attempt to slander a Christian. That troll that bothered them was a self identified atheist and I am starting to believe that “I Am A Fellow Lurker” was right in believing that the troll was rufustfirefly himself. The troll used filthy language and attacked everyone. The biggest troll on wearesmrt is named rufustfirefly.

      • The sockpuppet going by “chatroom lurker” wrote:

        Steve Chris doesn’t care anything about your blog. BathTub too.

        Failed mind-reading.

        Chris and BathTub are acting like a concern trolls and trying to tell you how to run your own blog.

        Misinterpretation on your part.

        I think their advice and his concern are completely insincere.

        That’s just wonderful that you think that. Do you have any evidence to support this thought, or did you just make it up?

        They don’t like to read what I am writing because it is the truth

        Riiiiiiight. That just MUST be the answer.

        Failed mind-reading.

        and it is showing people what some of the atheists are all about.

        Even IF you were correct (and I sure don’t think you are), it at most shows what specific individuals are like (and not “all about”). Using hyperbole to try to make your point only persuades me to think you’re making stuff up.

        Do you understand the difference between what a specific person does, and what a person of a group (completely unrelated to that group) does? This is why I don’t make a big deal about a murderer having a Christian background; that specific individual committed a crime, not all of Christianity.

        Seriously, get real, here.

        They are not the victims they are the perpetrators.

        An interesting accusation. Do you have any evidence, or are you making stuff up?

        Some of these atheists would love to see Ray, Tony and your website go away and they are conspiring on ways to do that.

        1. For the record, I don’t want that.

        2. Since you now have at least one atheists that does not want to see these people or this website go away, why not mention that specific people allegedly want this, instead of “some of these atheists”? Oh, because slander works better with a broad brush.

        3. You’ve now made another offensive accusation. Do you have any evidence of this, or are you a paranoid who is making stuff up?

        4. “Conspiring”? Seriously? Paranoid, much? Any evidence of this?

        Go to wearesmrt and read the Living Waters topic for evidence.

        I love this. “No, I won’t actually present evidence, I’ll just hint that evidence exists, since that’s enough to do damage without ever having to support my paranoid, conspiracy-theorist claims.”

        Bring it, don’t sing it. If you have evidence, why not actually supply the quotes?

        Any atheist attempt to slander a Christian.

        This is not a full sentence; I have no idea what you were trying to say here. But, my guess is that it’s an evidence-free hyperbolic attempt to slander people who are not you.

        If you have evidence, please present it. Otherwise, I’m likely to think you’re making stuff up.

        That troll that bothered them was a self identified atheist

        Finally you say something correct. I, personally, don’t care if the troll was an atheist or a Christian or a Hindu. All I care is that it was a troll, and I can’t stand trolls, including sockpuppet trolls.

        Ahem.

        and I am starting to believe that “I Am A Fellow Lurker” was right in believing that the troll was rufustfirefly himself.

        Now I’m wondering just how much of a paranoid conspiracy theorist you are. Think this idea through for a second.

        1. What’s the gain for Rufus by doing this? The troll said he was an atheist, so it’s not like any religion is being attacked by it.

        2. As BT pointed out, the troll’s IP address was different from Rufus’. The troll’s IP has been banned, and yet Rufus is still able to access the chatroom. Do you think Rufus is some leet hacker who’s able to switch IPs on a whim? Yet dumb enough to get one of them banned? This is how conspiracy theories fail.

        The troll used filthy language and attacked everyone.

        Correct. Which is why they were banned.

        For the record, the troll could have said whatever he wanted about me or my family; I don’t take what a troll says too seriously.

        The biggest troll on wearesmrt is named rufustfirefly.

        So you say; I disagree. I might not agree with Rufus on a lot of issues, but he’s hardly the biggest troll on wearesmrt, noob.

        In closing, I would appreciate it if, in the future, you at least attempted to support your claims with evidence instead of looking like you’re making stuff up. I’d certainly have a lot more respect for you if you did.

        Thank you.

      • The truth must be coming out because they are so upset about it.

        Do you really believe this silliness?

        So, if I was to say something completely offensive about your mother, and you (understandably) got upset about that, would I then be correct in saying “The truth must be coming out”?

        That’s insane.

      • Here is my two cents. Silly insults don’t hurt as much as the truth does.

      • So now the anonymous troll is making accusations that we are conspiring to make Ray, Tony and Steve’s website go away.

        They could of course quite easily link to the evidence of how we are conspiring to make your website go away.

        Or how we are conspiring to make Ray and Tony go away.

        Implied death threats.

        That’s the level of trolling you are allowing Steve.

        But of course, like every other time, the anonymous troll only makes cowardly accusations and then runs away.

      • Tammy wrote:

        Here is my two cents. Silly insults don’t hurt as much as the truth does.

        But Tammy, we are not talking about “silly insults”; we are talking about offensive insults, and there’s a big difference.

        Me saying that your mom’s feet are stinky is a “silly insult”.

        Me saying offensive things about your mom’s character are something else altogether. Do you agree?

        What the troll said in the chatroom were not “silly insults”.

        I’d rather not test this out, but I can certainly show that people definitely take offensive insults personally, even if there’s not a shred of truth in them.

        So, again I ask: If I made an offensive insult about your family to you, Tammy, and you were upset just even a bit by it, would claiming that “The truth must be coming out” be the least bit correct?

        I doubt it.

      • To chatroom troll
        You wrote “Steve Chris doesn’t care anything about your blog. BathTub too.”

        What would our concern for Steve’s blog or lack of same have to do with the argument that you will verbally attack and drive away everyone who posts here? Sounds like a red herring fallacy to me.

        This is Steve’s blog and he’s free to ignore me or think there’s something in what I say. I think everyone can see that there’s evidence that you don’t play well with others.

        He then wrote “Chris and BathTub are acting like a concern trolls and trying to tell you how to run your own blog. I think their advice and his concern are completely insincere.”

        Fascinating. 🙂 I didn’t know there were varieties of troll. According to wikipedia a troll is “someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

        Who does that definition resemble? Mr. Troll here or myself and Bathtub. If we are indeed offtopic I am quite happy to drop the topic at hand and get back on topic. How about you Mr. Troll?

        You then wrote “They don’t like to read what I am writing because it is the truth and it is showing people what some of the atheists are all about.”

        That’s fascinating…except I am NOT an atheist. Since I am not an atheist why would I object to any argument [as long as it’s honest] against atheism? Tsk, tsk. Lying is a sin you know.

        You then wrote “They are not the victims they are the perpetrators.”

        Run away from me everyone I am a perpetrator. 🙂 Of what I don’t know but I’m sure it must be true because Mr. Troll has made the claim after all. Surely he wouldn’t tell a lie. 🙂

        You then wrote “Some of these atheists would love to see Ray, Tony and your website go away and they are conspiring on ways to do that. Go to wearesmrt and read the Living Waters topic for evidence.”

        How do we intend to make any site go away? Do we have strange mental powers? Perhaps it’s that pact we made with the snoopy doll? Have you any idea how paranoid you sound?

        You then wrote “Any atheist attempt to slander a Christian.”
        Oh those horrible atheists. [gasp] 🙂 Trouble is, as I explained before, I’M NOT AN ATHEIST!

        You then ranted the following “That troll that bothered them was a self identified atheist and I am starting to believe that “I Am A Fellow Lurker” was right in believing that the troll was rufustfirefly himself.”
        Chris: Wrong and I can prove it.
        Chris 2: Can you really?
        Chris: Yes I can.
        Chris 2: Well I’m convinced.

        The moral of my silly little play was obvious. It’s kinda easy to convince yourself of anything. It’s usually a lot harder to convince other people.

        You then finished by asserted ” The troll used filthy language and attacked everyone.” You don’t mean he attacked everyone like you’re doing right now do you? Why that would be despicable [said in my best sylvester the cat voice] 🙂

      • Actually this is my only alias and I am a he not a her; I also am quite new to this blog, I have only read it for about two months now. I also do not know rufus from this blog or any other internet forum. Nice try though.

      • Chris wrote:

        I didn’t know there were varieties of troll.

        There actually are.

        From wikipedia:

        A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user claims to hold. The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group’s actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed “concerns”. The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.

  16. To Jim: The email was anonymous. Who knows who rufustfirefly or any other phony name is? If it’s anonymous, I may post it. I usually don’t do this. In fact, I don’t know when I did do it. Maybe once or twice.

    If an anonymous atheist insults me and calls names, i will show my readers the type of person that atheists is.

    Once again, we disagree.

  17. [I’m allowing this only for clarification purposes. Otherwise, I’m still waiting for an apology.]

    I used a email address that used my real name by accident. Sanchez didn’t post it.

  18. All It seems apparent that all of the atheists posting right now are not be honest about how rufustfirefly behaves and that he did infact make death threats to someone.

    • Oh look baseless accusation made without any evidence being made some a cowaredly anonymous troll for Jesus, what a surprise.

      And Steve allows it, even bigger surprise!

      The Troll made the issue extremely personal to rufus, seriously beyond a level many of you could even begin to imagine, and rufus went too far, that’s why the chat was taken down while we could figure out how to ban the troll properly. While rufus took it too far he was provoked into it.

      Funny how our anonymous troll for jesus knows so much about the situation yet repeatedly leaves out important information like that.

      But hey, Steve don’t let that stop you allowing the sock puppets to keep posting to defame people who can’t defend themselves.

      • Rufus probably defames someone almost every single day, for years. I have read his defamatory remarks about Ray Comfort, Tony Miano, Steve Sanchez, Chad and many other public Christians.

        Is Rufus T. Firefly his real name? I don’t think so. He can’t be defamed.

        All of the people I just listed blog and post under their real names. They can be defamed.

        Rufus also talks about people’s children, which I think is completely out of bounds. He also wishes death, pain and suffering onto Ray, Tony, Steve and others he doesn’t like. Is that right? Is Rufus a good example of atheists and atheism?

        Rufus also starts everything. I can’t imagine that poor innocent Rufus just got picked on one day. If Rufus doesn’t want enemies he should stop making them. I have seen him on other Christian sites provoking people.

        BathTub I think you and anyone else who defends Rufus is in danger of losing credibility. Does Rufus have some sort of mind control over you all? Are you afraid of him? I just can’t understand all of the support. Why defend the actions of someone like him? You must agree and support what he does. That is what it looks like to me. Birds of a feather flock together.

        I am going to make a prediction. Rufus is going to burn all of you one day.

        Rufus and people like him need help. There is something wrong with them to have so much hatred and wish so much violence on others. His language and the images he likes to posts underline my point. If you were his friend(s) you would stop encouraging him.

        You know what I am saying is true.

        I’m sure I am going to be called a troll or told I am a sockpuppet. I chose a different name today because I needed to say this.

        Thanks Steve for letting me say my peace.

      • I am an atheist, I do not know rufus, I am posting right now, and I am being biblically honest.

        You lose.

      • Remember our friendly anonymous trolls have already claimed that the wearesmrt forums are conspiring to get rid of Ray and Tony and take down Steve’s website. Claims that would take 5 seconds to prove if they were real.

        Instead of backing up anything they say, they just make up more claims.

        Who’s the person with credibility issues here?

        I respond on topic, and of course the trolls skip that post again to pile on more BS.

        I already said that rufus took things too far and that’s why we took down the chat. But keep pretending that I didn’t say anything to that effect it really helps your credibilty. So you are blatantly lying (again) that I agree and support what he did.

        Once again I will throw out “Why do people who believe lying is a sin worthy of eternal torment lie to easily?”

  19. Keep it up, Pastor Steve! God is using your efforts here for His glory.

  20. Steve I don’t find anything wrong with your Sudden Death posts. You should blog about what interests you.

  21. [pinches bridge of nose]

    Okay, there’s a few items that need to be mentioned and settled here.

    First of all, the repetitive sockpuppet “chatroom lurker” shows a disturbing knowledge of events that took place in the wearesmrt chatroom, and seems to delight in bringing them up with much the same level of malicious joy as the troll involved in that incident. Further, their username seems deliberately chosen as a reference to that incident.

    I would be willing to say with a moderate amount of certainty that it’s the same person. If this is the case, than “chatroom lurker” is guilty of deliberately and sadistically using the personal tragedy of another for no other purpose than to senselessly provoke and anger.

    Steve: I would highly recommend getting in touch with one of the wearesmrt.com admininstrators so you can compare “chatroom lurker”s IP address to that of the troll involved in that incident. If they are the same individual, then I would highly recommend banning them. I hope you can see my reasoning for this recommendation: this person is not interested in dialog, respectful or otherwise.

    Now, on to more fun things!

  22. lol! Completely stuffed up the formatting one sentence in. Steve, could I get you to not let that one through? Here’s the corrected version:

    Carl wrote (elsewhere in this thread):
    “Jim why do you keep using lame and flawed reasons… not to believe the Gospel?”

    Well, I can’t speak for Jim but I thought an honest, open answer might be helpful to the discussion here. No snark, I promise…

    My reasons not to believe the Gospel are mostly circumstantial. For instance, the events described in Genesis are demonstratably inaccurate, but Genesis isn’t the gospel and there are plenty of arguments to be made that Genesis is a moral narrative, not a historical one. And I don’t agree that the Ten Commandments are a perfect moral law, but then again Jesus made a pretty compelling case that following the old law was less important than his own take on it: “do unto others” (which I jokingly refer to as the “one commandment to rule the all”). And finally, I consider the various miracles described in the bible to be unverifiable and frankly a bit rediculous. We have no record other than the bible (written by christians for christians) of these astonishing anomalies in an otherwise logical universe. Some of them, like the sun standing still, and the darkness and the dead rising during Christs crucifixion, should be mentioned in other texts… but aren’t.

    But ultimately all this adds up to so much smoke. They’re compelling reasons to believe the bible is a text written and compiled by men, but they’re not “reasons not to believe the Gospel”: none of them disprove the central tenant of Christianity, that Jesus Christ was the divine son of god. He could well have been, despite everything I’ve just said.

    The reason I’m an atheist is not a matter of having “reasons not to believe the Gospel”. It’s a matter of having “no reasons to believe the Gospel”.

    Now I know you’re a Living Waters disciple and are even now thinking “the evidence is all around us in creation!” and “he’s just suppressing the truth in unrighteousness”, but hear me out on this one, okay?

    Humans have been collecting evidence about the nature of the universe for centuries, and I’m lucky enough to live in a time when I can have as much access to that evidence as I want (seriously, how awesome is that?!). Not just evidence we can see with our eyes, either, but evidence in the infrared and ultraviolet spectrums, evidence billions of light-years away in space and evidence so tiny entire worlds of it can be contained in a petrie dish. Evidence in matter and physics, in life and biology, in genes and genetics, and so on.

    So, I’ve looked at it, because it’s awesome and because I can. And everything I see in it adds up to a very detailed, very complex picture of the universe: far, far more detailed than anything you could fit into 788,280 words split over 66 books.

    And I swear that to the absolute best of my knowledge I’m not lying, I’m not supressing the truth in unrighteousness, when I say: nothing in that picture points me towards the universe being created by a diety, or Jesus being the son of said deity.

    Now, the picture isn’t entirely complete. There is a hole at the very start of the universe, and there’s a few holes around the time Jesus existed. Christianity could probably be squeezed into them. But the picture itself doesn’t point towards that: I have to want to squeeze those parts into those holes if I’m going to do so. If I want to believe, I need to use faith.

    And I can’t do that. I’m an analytical skeptic: my beliefs have to be built on a firm foundation of observation and fact. I can’t just choose to believe something without that evidence: my mind won’t work that way no matter how hard I try to make it. Faith isn’t compatible with my mind.

    (To quickly pre-empt: by my definitions here, confidence is not the same thing as faith. I have confidence, based on previous evidence, that the sun will rise tomorrow. But I don’t have faith that it will, because faith (as I’m using the term) is believing in something without needing evidence)

    Now if you’re still thinking “he’s just suppressing the truth in unrighteousness” or something like at this stage, then please go back and reread what I wrote. I. AM. NOT. LYING. The above is an accurate, honest insight into my mind. If I was supressing the truth, I would have to lie, and claim that there were no holes in our knowledge, or that nothing at all in christianity was compatible with reality.

    So that’s it. Boiled down, it comes to this: I’m an atheist because I can’t believe in things until I see evidence for them. Simple as that.

    If you still want to think you know my mind better than I, that Living Waters are right and I’m just lying because I’d rather stew in my sin and go to hell, then go right on ahead. I can’t stop you. But rest assured, you’ll never convert any skeptic unless you can face up to the reality of the way the skeptical mindset works. To use a warfare analogy: I’ve just given you a map to every enemy entrenchment in the country. The only way you could possibly lose now would be if you either completely ignore the map, or if the gnu atheists are right and your forces amount to two 80 year old midgets with a broken marshmellow gun between them. (okay, maybe a tiny amount of snark 🙂 )

    Hope this helps clarify the skeptical mindset for you guys,
    Quasar

  23. SteveSteve. Despite the efforts of rufustfirefly’s friends at wearesmrt to label me as their chatroom “troll” I am not that person. I think they are trying to intimidate me into not talking about what happened in their chatroom.

    I am not taking any delight in what I am posting. I am posting what I think is the truth based upon what I actually saw in the chatroom and what I read in the forums.

    This post is about rufustfirefly and my posts I believe or on topic with this post and it makes other people familiar with the type of person that you Steve had had to deal with. There is nothing malicious about what I have written.

    The wearesmrtians are attempting to silence me by lieing and saying what I am saying is not true. No one from wearesmrt has admitted that rufustfirefly did indeed make death threats to a person in their chatroom. The evidence is in the forum threads unless they have erased them which despite what some wearesmrtians say they do censor and delete any incriminating information.

    Steve please do not share with them any of your poster’s ISP numbers or information because the wearesmrtians are obsessed with ISP numbers. I am not sure if they are trying to stalk people online. It is my opinion that some individuals from that website would. I think online stalking and making death threats online is illegal but I’m not sure. That should be a warning to all of the ISP curious wearesmrtians.

    If the wearesmrtians want to send you the ISP number of their “troll” who I think might be one of their own using another computer let them send you the information. Since I am not their chatroom troll I am 100 percent confident that my ISP does not match the one that they have for their troll.

    Once again Steve please do not send them anyone’s information especially mine. I am just reporting what I know and have seen. I am a chatroom lurker and of course I saw what went down.

    • How about we just don’t talk about that other site. I really don’t care what happened over there at all.
      Let’s stick to this topic, okay?

      • Steve it is your blog and I won’t mention that other site. I thought my comments were on topic and I am sorry that they weren’t. Please delete anything I said that wasn’t appropriate.

    • despite what some wearesmrtians say they do censor and delete any incriminating information.

      And, of course, like always, you have no evidence to support this accusation. You just make stuff up willy-nilly.

      To my knowledge, no censoring or deleting of anything has ever happened at that site. If it did, I would have a major problem with it, regardless of who did it and who it was done to.

      The wearesmrtians are attempting to silence me by lieing and saying what I am saying is not true

      I don’t think you’re so dumb as to not understand that you’ve been accused of distorting some (not all, but some) of the information.

      Nice attempt at spin, but I noticed it.

      Also, I noticed how you seem bothered by being accused of something you claim you had nothing to do with. If you’re being honest, then that’s not fair and it’s pretty annoying, right?

      I hope you consider that the next time you make a baseless accusation of other people. If nothing else gets accomplished here, I hope that does.

      Lastly, it’s an IP number, not an ISP number.

      • Nope the only censoring that happened was the profane troll getting their posts deleted.

        We have plenty of Christian members, Living Waters staff members even have accounts. Tony Miano and Chad Williams have accounts and those are just the ones we know of directly.

        How on earth are we supposed to intimidate you?

        The only way we could possibily intimidate you anonymous trolls is repeatedly point out that you are making claims that would take 5 seconds to prove if they were real.

        But instead of proving they were real you make up more claims and run away.

    • Hey Mr. Chatroom Troll

      Here’s a song with you in mind.
      Paranoia strikes deep.
      [The wearesmrtians are attempting to silence me by lieing]

      Into your life it will creep.
      It starts when you’re always afraid.
      [Once again Steve please do not send them anyone’s information especially mine]

      Step outta line the man comes and takes you away.
      You better STOP! 🙂

  24. You aren’t interested in our conspiracy to take your website down Steve?

    I know I certainly am!

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.