Gibberish

…. Or actually, I would say that the religion of atheism only arises against the theistic religion. There’s nothing that an atheist can argue which would be able to allow its brand of religion to escape it’s theological assertions. that is, only by reliance upon the ability for definition to indicate true things can we define ourselves into situations. But this does not get to the truth of the matter that atheism so vehemently often proclaims. Like Richard Dockins, his views on things are so myopic and stubborn, it’s almost ridiculous to read anything by him, that is, and less I’m trying to make a career out of selling books or writing papers. Which really has nothing to do with atheism. They would be more righteous calling themselves pure capitalists. 😁

The above is a comment i saw on Jim’s blog. There could be other bad ones, but this takes credit for appearing to have been generated by a bullshit generator. Having said that, the author must believe Turek right for arguing that atheists steal from god. Atheism however makes no theological assertions per se and if it does, it is show that the theologian has not proved their case.

And it is Richard Dawkins. And his books on biology and evolution make for very interesting reading. His books on religion or lack of it, not very much so but at least I am sure they are much better than whatever the author of the above comment can come up with.

And how many times must it be said atheism is not a religion? Maybe we can say with Peter, Paul and Mary the answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind.

Public service announcement

We interrupt our irregular broadcast to bring to your attention this very important new item that reached our desk.

We will be waiting with bated breathe for this day.

where to search for truth and other stories

I know you have been wondering where your search for truth should begin. I have the answer for you, even you Jeff. The whole truth and nothing else is to be found in the bible. Every other book is fiction. And wait, this is big. In fact, we can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that every word in the Bible is true. I want proof that the ass spoke with Balaam. Barry, like you, I wonder if these people believe what they write.

I didn’t know Imagine by the Beatles is Atheist National Anthem- that is, I didn’t know there is a nation of Atheists. But it does seem some unhinged fellow took umbrage with the song because a version of it was played at the Japan 2020 Olympics Opening ceremony. Even the comments on that site are unhinged.

Americans must be at a loss where there is polarization at home. I got the answer. It is in sex/ sexuality. The nation has accepted the atheist view of sexuality and it is wrecking havoc. You should adopt the Mormon view or the Islamic view. This will help heal the rifts in the nation sooner than you can say sex.

But the best is this 2013 article from AIG on the flood. The good fellows at AIG say of the gods in the Epic of Gilgamesh that they are

capricious, cowardly, and dependent upon humans for either worship or nourishment. Because the gods cannot “tune out” human noise, they have to seek ways to reduce human population

forgetting that the god of the bible destroys the tower of Babel because it can’t tune out human noise, chases the first family out of Eden because they have become like the gods, and is dependent on human worship. There are laws/ commands and punishments for worshiping other gods among other things. Maybe the good fellow didn’t read those parts.

They tell us the story of Noah bears internal consistency. How many pairs of birds boarded the Ark? I will wait.

I like how the writers dismiss the similarities between the Epic of Gilgamesh and Noah’s flood by saying the 300 year gap between when they were written means they were all written close to the actual flood.

The best part is this

Moreover, the rest of Scripture considers the events of Genesis 6–9 to be factual history. For example, the writer of 1 Chronicles records Noah as being the ancestor of Abraham (1 Chronicles 1:4, 1:27). Jesus mentions Noah as a real historical person and the Flood as a real historical event (Matthew 24:37–39). Luke includes Noah in the genealogy of Christ (Luke 3:36), while Peter twice mentions that Noah built the Ark and was one of only eight people saved (1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5).

How do you know the bible is true? Because the bible says in this part that it’s claim in an earlier chapter is true. Jesus whose historicity is doubtful is called upon to support Noah whose historicity is even more doubtful. I love these fellows at AIG.

Have a great week everyone.

Terrible essay on religion or lack of it

There are terrible essays, then there is this by J Maren. He says in an interview with a Ferguson, he (Ferguson) said atheism is a religious faith that he was brought up in. He went on to say it is as much a faith as Christianity or Islam. And finished by making the observation that

atheism, particularly in its militant forms, is really a very dangerous metaphysical framework for a society

And at this point, I have questions. Creeds such as Christianity or Islam have books, or tenets of beliefs, they often have founders and a lot of other requirements. Now what could be the similarities between atheism and Islam or Judaism? How, in its militant form, whatever that means, is it a danger to society? Do they kill believers?

What else had Ferguson to say?

I know I can’t achieve religious faith,” he went on, “but I do think we should go to church. We don’t have, I don’t think, an evolved ethical system. I don’t buy the idea that evolution alone gets us to be moral. It can modify behavior, but there’s just too much evidence that in the raw, when the constraints of civilization fall away, we behave in the most savage way to one another. I’m a big believer that with the inherited wisdom of a two-millennia old religion, we’ve got a pretty good framework to work with.

This is interesting. For thousands of years, our loving and merciful father forgot about his creation. Left men without a religion. Without morals and remembered to send this information much later and topped it up with a suicide or is it a deicide.

If Maren is right, we must believe that before Christianity there was no forgiveness. Maren tells us, in part

What we do know is that he thought Christianity was in many ways the soul of Western civilization, and that the uniquely Christian concept of forgiveness was utterly indispensable to its survival.

I don’t know about you, but I know I am have not

My fear is that the Church is not doing what so many of us on the outside want it to do, which is preaching its gospel, asserting its truths and its claims

wanted the church to do anything except that believers keep their faith private.

Maren then tells of an interview with D MUrray who

believes that Christianity is essential because secularists have been thus far totally incapable of creating an ethic of equality that matches the concept that all human beings are created in the image of God

Which is interesting from where I stand. It appears there has been a difference between belief and practice. But the less said about this the better. Reminds me of when Haitians revolted following the French declaration of Freedom, Liberty and Fraternity, there were locked in a revolt with the French for 12 years until the defeat of Napoleon’s army.

In his conclusion, Maren writes that the west and Christianity are tied at the hip. The west will not long survive without Christianity. The sooner you all start joining the church nearest to you, the longer the western civilization will last. It is all up to you.

Or maybe I am wrong.

California repent

This is so hilarious.

Judgement is coming upon the Uneducated States of America. And why is this? The evangelicals- the chosen ones of god-, are under attack, evolution is being taught as fact, god has been taken out of schools and the masses have forgotten god.

You want to know what else America has done to anger god? Everything has become political (strange if you ask me. I thought they are generally always are), racial (when were they not?) and taboo (this is the most interesting), there is a love for money, nice cars and houses, child sacrifice (Jeff stop eating people’s babies), and there is sexual immorality (people stop having sex while standing. Sex should only be missionary and for procreation only).

What to do? Repent for the time is nigh. And god is a just judge so he must pass sentence. I though she was also merciful so she must act mercifully by forgiving as many times as we are asked to forgive but then that’s rational thinking.

Brian, California has been singled out to be the worst of all the states. You fellows have singly and severally angered god that the brimstone that is coming to rain on you is still doing weight lifting.

On sports

Or on sports and transgender.

For some reason, after solving the world hunger problem, there has been desire by some quarters to have transgender females or is it males participate in women sports and the response has definitely been divided. I have read and maybe some of you too, that these days all it takes to be a woman is to feel it inside your heart and that’s all. There are transgender people who are having hormonal treatment to reduce their testosterone but whether this is sufficient to allow them to participate in an all women activity is a matter of debate.

Now, I have no problem with any one participating in any athletic endeavour. Why not have categories that cover every group. All male; All female; Trans male/ female though I have not heard of a trans male who wants to participate in a male sporting event. Maybe I haven’t read widely, which can be forgiven.

What do you think sporting bodies or organizers should do?

sometimes you find a post so bad

you actually sympathise with the author. And that applies to this one I have come across today titled atheism: the most dangerous religion.

The first claim of atheism we are told is that first there was nothing then there was something and I think this author has his religion confused. In the beginning, so the bybull tells us, god created the heavens and the earth but from what? Enquiring minds want to know. I know I have read Lawrence Krauss a Universe from Nothing. You can listen to the short video linked.

I didn’t know Darwin was the god of atheists. I was today years old when I learnt this new fact. And how is he our god? By convincing us life simply evolved from non-life. I will leave this here for now.

What are the main teachings of atheism? 1. evolution; 2. nothing to everything; 3. because science says, and 4. “the lack of evidence is evidence enough”. I thought it would be sufficient to respond that these are not the teachings of atheism, that is, if it has any teaching. Atheism simply, and this is a matter of debate some places, is a lack of belief in theism. It is possible after this for an atheist to make certain commitments in fields of knowledge say such as biology (evolution), cosmology. Point 3 is a straw man and number 4 is just common sense.

Now we come to why it is dangerous.

  1. Morality because you have no justification to be moral. The argument being without a god and its attendant threats and promises you can’t be moral.
  2. Atheists don’t believe in an afterlife.
  3. You are unnecessarily hateful- you tear down theists, make them look stupid which leads to Christians being bullied and harassed. And you know what, this is why 1st Century persecution happened and why Nero danced while Rome burned. I am not making this up. He wrote it. And the best response i can think of is laughter.

But there is a solution. Accept Jesus and you will be cured from this hatred.

Go and find Jesus. If you meet him, say Mak sent you.

how did you meet da lawd

it was in a philosophical argument. And no, I am not kidding. So if you have been looking for a reason to believe in god, maybe the place to begin is to read the Ontological argument by Anselm. Or maybe Pascal’s wager for those easily scared into submission. I will be here waiting for your confessions as to which argument brought you closer to god. I will be waiting to hear how you moved from the teleological argument to a believing that Krishna is the true god and no other truer god can be found.

Have a great week everyone.

Do fronkeys exist?

The fact that asking “Does fronkey exist?” assumes fronkey exists is quite important. It reminds us that fronkey’s existence is intuitive and known by everyone. Fronkey is not hiding, but maybe we are.

If you think the above premise is sound, you have a problem. It implies if we can think something, the object of our thoughts must really exist beyond our thoughts. This is the species of argument some theists make as an apology for their belief in god. They however, argue that god occupies a special category of objects unlike unicorns or fronkeys so that my restatement of the argument above would not apply to Santa Claus but only to god. I think that is a case of special pleading.

An apologist, Andrew Sveda, in his post, thoughts on god’s existence, argues that to ask the question does god exist implies or assumes god exists in three distinct ways. One, that had we evolved by natural selection, we would not have developed truth seeking abilities; we would have no desire for truth and finally because our lives have meaning and purpose.

Since adaptation improves chances of survival- that is the organism that is best adapted (fittest) to its environment survives, and if truth seeking helps with this adaptation, then it will be developed. And while we have this cognitive ability, how many people use theirs? We have people believing asses talked and Jonah ate a fish and it remained alive for three days in his stomach!

He writes To say someone should believe something because it’s true can only hold if man has some objective purpose, which the atheist must deny. Which is quite interesting. Many people believe as true things that are patently false without any help from atheists. And believing something is true has nothing to do with objective purpose whatever that is. 1+1 is 2 whether your life has purpose or not.

I don’t know, but it seems to me some religious apologists don’t take time even to read on what has been written by other apologists and the responses to those arguments.

And finally, it should always be remembered that however great an argument is, it would take a leap of faith to come from argument for something to the something being actual.

in defense of Judas

When a guy is a snitch in an organization, he is called a Judas. Many times you hear the admonition don’t be a Judas but I think for the sake of literature, Judas needs rehabilitation. Read that passage again. For believers, it is found in Mathew 26. Who even told Judas the high priests were meeting and how did he manage this feat. Who sent him information the priests needed an informant, a Judas, pun intended.

At the table, Jesus already knows one of his disciples will betray him that evening and even says the scriptures already declared the son of man must die. He decides not to be a Judas and make this information public to his disciples nor does he take measures against his being betrayed. It is more like he wanted it to go down that way. At the end he paraphrases Ecclesiastes better not to be born when he tells his disciples that for him that shall betray him, it was better for him not to have been born.

If anything, this is one of the verses in the bible that portray Jesus as a nondescript preacher-man in some remote village. Why, if he had been driving out demons, healing the sick would identifying him be so hard? Is it the case there was nothing outstanding about him?

What was the need for the chief priest to pay 30 pieces of silver when all the soldiers needed to do was come and ask who is the Jesus fellow, that is if there was none among them who could tell him out to the rest.

I think Judas saw an opportunity to make easy money and took it. Jesus had it coming. What else had he come for, anyway? And how did he see it going down?