I found this letter on a blog here. I have edited it slightly and have asked permission to reproduce it. Wouldn't it be fun to send it out to a few chosen people!
Dear
I am atheist. The Qur'an calls me infidel and I am deeply disturbed by what I find in Islam and its rituals. It seems to me to that there are passages which clearly promote hatred of all who are not Muslim.
Surah 9:5 states quite clearly that devotees of the faith should...
"fight and slay the pagans (or infidels or unbelievers) wherever you find them?"
As the Muslims are always stating, for them the Qur'an is the revealed word of 'god', so we must assume that they take this instruction seriously. I, as an Infidel, must therefore also take the instruction seriously.If even a single Muslim chose to follow the instruction to the letter, or simply misconstrue it, my life could be ended. And, when it takes more than 2700 words to explain why the 13 word instruction does not mean what it clearly states, I suggest the passage is permanently in danger of being misconstrued!
As we see devout believers carrying out the extreme instructions of the Qur'an almost on a daily basis, it would be the act of a fool to simply trust that the instruction will not ever be followed by any devout believer. I must therefore assume that when in the proximity of even a moderate Muslim my life is in danger merely because my path of rational freethinking conflicts with Islamic doctrine. I write this letter under an assumed identity because of that assumption.
As a UK [Politician or Policeman], I feel you are doing me and the rest of the UK non-Muslim population (97.2% of general population) a serious disservice if you do not take the violent instructions in the book seriously. I wonder why no one in authority has. It seems quite clear to me that Islam, the Qur'an and Shariat, Imams and every Muslim from moderate to extremist, all, in some way or other, contravene the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
How do the Qur'an's numerous hateful passages not contravene paragraph 29g?
How are the Qur'an's publishers and distributors not in contravention of paragraph 29c?
How are the Imams and preachers not in contravention of 29b and 29c?
Every time a Muslim prays, Islam compels each to recite an affirmation of the denunciation of, at best, Jews and Christians, and at worst, ALL that is none Muslim.
Please note here, that even the 'at best' is deeply offensive to all who believe in the Declaration of Human Rights and the 'at worst' is deeply offensive to the rest on the Human race!!
How is that not in contravention of paragraph 29b?
Further, by placing itself as the 'superior way to live' a doctrine simultaneously infers all other paths are inferior. This is derogatory, discriminatory and disparaging of all other paths; paths that the rest of the human race (more than 80% of the world's population) find equally, or more, valid. In my view this instruction for all Muslims to consider themselves superior is, at best, elitist and separatist, just like the Nazism, and, at worst, keeping in mind the well known phrase "If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.", it should be assumed that a doctrine which does not promote integration, is not conducive with unity and peace and thereby is promoting the opposite of those states.
And all that's without even getting started on the instruction to Jihad or Qur'an 4:34, which appears to permit domestic violence! I would like the offending passages of the Qur'an removed. How can I feel safe while they exist?
If Islam is truly a religion of peace, the Muslims must also surely be in favour of the removal of a few passages which directly threaten innocent life simply for being free of thought. As it stands Surah 1:7 is an affirmation and promotion of religious bigotry, a direct statement of hate which is recited multiple times each day by even moderate Muslims. I would like Surah 1:7 modified to remove the hatred and include 'all paths', not just the prejudicial Muslim one. All recitations of this Surah should be modified accordingly.
Now, I'm not unrealistic, I know it's going to take a bit of time for the Muslim brothers and sisters to gather an opinion on the form of the necessary rewrite for the Qur'an. And I realize that proper scrutiny of any 'new' version of the Qur'an by the authorities could take years, so, in the mean time, I'd like all currently circulating Qur'an to be collected and suitably disposed of. After the hate speech has been edited out, the old Qur'ans would be of no use anyway. Also, so that prayers would not have to be suspended, until the rewrite is published and circulated, all prayers should be modified to at least remove the hateful recitations.
If there are any Muslims who are not in favour of the suggested changes, they should be seen as wishing to continue the hate, a clear infraction of 29b and could be encouraged to find accommodation in a country more conducive with their hateful stance.
As a side question here...
If a book were produced in 2010 which clearly stated death to a culture because of its beliefs or non belief, do you think it would be allowed to be published? Would its publication not be restricted under the Public Order Act?
There is a further issue of equality here.
When we are about to have an increase of faith schools, why should Muslims be allowed to preach and teach such blatantly hateful intolerance? As I see it, with an eye to equality, should it not ALSO be lawful to teach kids in other faith schools that it's their duty to...
"Slay Muslims wherever you find them"?
Perhaps a pamphlet could be issued?
In France a lawsuit against publishers of the Bible and Qur'an is currently under way. The lawsuit is privately funded (they are seeking donations) and cites the scriptures as the origin of death threats which various members of the atheists in action group have received from the religious. I hope it will have some success.
I am unfortunately penniless but I hope someone will take up the baton for the UK's freedom.
I would hope that the Police, Members of Parliament, Home Secretary, Prime minister would act to protect myself and my fellow non-Muslims from the very real threat of violence from followers and purveyors of the Qur'an. Failing that, I'd hope the Secular Society or Humanist Society or the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, or a collective of the free thinking organisations could mount some legal challenge.
Yours ....
19 December 2010
Dear Christians at Christmas time
Your 'all powerful', 'all knowing' god created humankind a few thousand years ago, didn't like how they turned out so drowned most of them, men, women, children, babies and animals.
Human Race Version Two gets under way but there is still too much wickedness so God (Who seems to have mellowed a little by this time) has to send himself to earth as his 'only son' so that he can be sacrificed to atone for the sin of all mankind. To do this he needs to impregnate a woman (who may have been as young as fourteen) so that she will give birth to the 'son of god'. Interesting how this is a theme in so many religions preceeding xtianity. A deity really couldn't be born from somewhere that was 'unclesn' now could it?
After being nailed to the cross in a bit of torture porn, Jesus is 'dead' for a couple of days and then rises up to heaven to be with his father (himself) and some dude called the 'holy spirit'. If you are catholic, you get to eat the flesh of christ as often as you choose.
I will be celebrating christmas by watching the George A. Romero back catalogue. Seems quite apt really.
Human Race Version Two gets under way but there is still too much wickedness so God (Who seems to have mellowed a little by this time) has to send himself to earth as his 'only son' so that he can be sacrificed to atone for the sin of all mankind. To do this he needs to impregnate a woman (who may have been as young as fourteen) so that she will give birth to the 'son of god'. Interesting how this is a theme in so many religions preceeding xtianity. A deity really couldn't be born from somewhere that was 'unclesn' now could it?
After being nailed to the cross in a bit of torture porn, Jesus is 'dead' for a couple of days and then rises up to heaven to be with his father (himself) and some dude called the 'holy spirit'. If you are catholic, you get to eat the flesh of christ as often as you choose.
I will be celebrating christmas by watching the George A. Romero back catalogue. Seems quite apt really.
13 October 2010
Discussions re God on Sheffield Forum
"I know there has been lots of "discussions" on here about God and I saw this interesting tweet on Twitter tonight, which I thought summed it up nicely.
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."
But that's just not true as there are lots of things which could convince me to believe in a god and so far as I can tell the same applies to most other atheists.
In fact some atheists (in this case the excellent Ebon) even go to the trouble of drawing up lists of the kinds of things which would convince them in the hope that it will improve the quality of the emails theists send them:
The Theist's Guide to Converting Atheists
What would convince an atheist that a religion is true?
In several years of debating atheism and theism, I have made an observation. Ask any believer what would convince him he was mistaken and persuade him to leave his religion and become an atheist, and if you get a response, it will almost invariably be, "Nothing - I have faith in my god." Although such people may well exist, I personally have yet to meet a theist who would acknowledge even the possibility that his belief was in error. Many theists, by their own admission, structure their beliefs so that no evidence could possibly disprove them. In short, they are closed-minded, and have been taught to be closed-minded. (For more on this, see "Thoughts in Captivity".)
In light of this, it is ironic that atheists are often accused of being the closed-minded ones. Fundamentalist proselytizers very frequently claim that we are hard-hearted, that we are dogmatic and irrational, that we reject God based on preconceived bias, and so on. Such claims result from psychological projection. Incapable of coping with the fact that there are some people who genuinely do not believe in their god, these theists simply deny that such people exist, and instead insist that everyone thinks the same way they do. Therefore, people who reach different conclusions than them must have some secret ulterior motive for not believing. This is truly ridiculous, but unfortunately, some people really believe it.
Thus, in the spirit of proving that atheists' minds are not closed, I've assembled below a list of everything I can think of that I would accept as proof that a given religion is true. Also included are things that I would accept as circumstantial evidence of a particular religion's truth and things that would not be acceptable to me as proof of anything. While I do not claim to speak for all atheists, I would confidently say that any religion that could produce one of the things from the first list would probably gain a great number of converts.
The first category deals with things that would absolutely convince me of the truth of a particular religion. If shown any of these, I would convert on the spot.
Verified, specific prophecies that couldn't have been contrived.
If the Bible, for example, said, "On the first day of the first month in the year two thousand and ten, the pillars of the earth will shake and a great part of the New World will be lost to the sea," and then January 1, 2010 comes and a tremendous earthquake sends California to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, I would become a believer. No points are awarded under any of the following conditions:
If the prophecy is vague, unclear or garbled (like Nostradamus' ramblings, for example). It must be detailed, specific and unambiguous in its prediction and wording.
If the prophecy is trivial. Anyone could predict that it will be cold next winter, or that this drought/plague/flood will eventually subside. The prophecy must predict something surprising, unlikely or unique.
If the prophecy is obviously contrived for other reasons. No official seer or court astrologer ever predicted that the king he worked for would be a brutal, evil tyrant who would ruin the country.
If the prophecy is self-fulfilling; i.e., if the mere fact of the prophecy's existence could cause people to make it come true. The Jewish people returned to their homeland in Israel just as the Bible said they would, but this isn't a genuine prediction - they did it because the Bible said they would. The predicted event can't be one that people could stage.
If the prophecy predicts an event that already happened and the writing of the prophecy itself can't be shown to have preceded the event.
If the prophecy predicts an event that already happened and the happening of that event can't be verified by independent evidence. For example, Christian apologists claim that Jesus fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies, but the authors of the New Testament obviously had access to those prophecies also; what would have prevented them from writing their story to conform to them? The extra-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus is so scanty that it is impossible to disprove such a proposal.
And finally, if the prophecy is the lone success among a thousand failures. Anyone can throw prophecies against the wall until one sticks. The book or other source from which it comes must have at least a decently good record on other predictions.
These conditions, I think, are eminently reasonable, and are only what would be expected of a true prophet with a genuine gift.
Scientific knowledge in holy books that wasn't available at the time.
If the Bible (or any other religious text) contained some piece of knowledge that the people of the time couldn't possibly have known but that is now known to be true, that would be highly convincing to me. A passage about the atomic theory of matter or the heliocentric solar system would be interesting, but not conclusive, since the Greeks, for example, proposed those ideas long ago independent of any claim to divine revelation.
A mention of the theory of evolution would have been impressive. A reference to the germ theory of disease, or the laws of electromagnetics, would have been compelling. But what would be indisputable proof would be an elucidation of a truly modern theory of physics, such as relativity or quantum mechanics - not just something that the people of the time couldn't possibly have known of, but something so counter-intuitive that the odds against guessing at it correctly would be staggering. Just think: What if Jesus had said something like this?
"Verily, verily, I say unto thee that thine energy is as thine mass times the speed of light multiplied unto itself."
Of course people of the time would have been baffled, but just imagine how many souls it would have saved today. As with the prophecy item, there must be independent verification that the piece of knowledge was written in texts that existed well before it was actually discovered by science.
Miraculous occurrences, especially if brought about through prayer.
If cities condemned as sinful by preachers tended to explode in flames for no apparent reason, if glowing auras of holy light sometimes appeared around believers to protect them from harm, or if atheists and only atheists were regularly struck by lightning, this would be compelling proof. But it wouldn't have to be so dramatic; even minor but objectively verifiable miracles would do, especially if they could be invoked by prayer. If a hospital did a double-blind study to determine if intercessory prayer helps the sick, and it was discovered that only the patients prayed for by members of a certain religion experienced a dramatic, statistically significant increase in recovery rate, and this result could be repeated and confirmed, I would convert. This one shouldn't be so hard, especially for the Christians - after all, Jesus told them that they would be able to work miracles through prayer!
Any direct manifestation of the divine.
I'm not that hard to convert; I'll be happy to believe in God if he tells me to in person, as long as he does it in such a way that I could be sure that it was not a hallucination (for example, in the presence of multiple reliable witnesses, none of which are in a highly emotional or otherwise altered state). Where are the voices speaking out of burning bushes, or out of thin air when people get baptized? In Old Testament times, Moses saw God so often that he knew him on a first-name basis. Why doesn't this happen any more today?
Aliens who believed in the exact same religion.
And one more, though this one is just a bit off the wall. If humanity was to contact an extraterrestrial civilization, and if said extraterrestrials had a religion that was exactly like some religion on Earth, I would become a believer. (Though it would raise some interesting theological problems for Christians. Does Jesus have to travel to every planet in the universe individually, dying and being resurrected on each one?)
The second category deals with things that would not be conclusive, but that would count as circumstantial evidence. Show me one of these and I might not convert right away, but your religion will look a lot better to me.
A genuinely flawless and consistent holy book.
True inerrancy is, so to speak, the holy grail of theism. Almost every religion claims their scripture is perfect, but none that I know of have actually met this exacting standard; I have yet to read a holy text entirely without error or self-contradiction. A book that was free of such problems would be circumstantial evidence in favor of the religion that possessed it, but not compelling, since this is still explicable as the result of purely human forces.
A religion without internal disputes or factions.
It seems reasonable to expect that, if there existed a god that was interested in revealing itself to humanity and desired that we follow its commands, that god would write down whatever instructions it had to give us in a way that was only amenable to one interpretation. Thus, if a religion was true, we might expect that no factions or sects would form within it and all members of that religion would speak with one voice regarding ethical and theological issues. Why the alternative scenario should ever hold for an inspired religion is not clear. Did God intend to communicate his message clearly but failed to do so? However, since this could still be the result of human influence, it would only be circumstantial, not conclusive, evidence in favor of a given religion's truth.
A religion whose followers have never committed or taken part in atrocities.
If a given religion's sacred text consistently promotes peace, compassion and nonviolence, and if that religion's history reflects that fact, that religion would look much more attractive to me. Historically, almost every religion that has ever had the power to do so has persecuted those who believed differently, and I do not think it likely that a morally good deity would allow his chosen faith's good name to be smeared by evil and fallible humans.
A religion that had a consistent record of winning its jihads and holy wars.
Strangely, none do. One can only wonder why.
The final category deals with things that would not convince me; none of the following would persuade me to rethink my position. To date, all the evidence I have ever seen presented for any religion falls into this category.
Speaking in tongues or other pseudo-miracles.
To convince me, a miracle would have to be genuine, verifiable, and represent a real and inexplicable divergence from the ordinary. Anything that can be explained by peer pressure, the power of suggestion or the placebo effect does not count. Favorable coincidences or kind or courageous acts performed by human beings also do not meet this standard. (This post clearly illuminates the difference: "Biblical miracles aren't about accidents and people saying 'Whew, that was close.' Biblical miracles are people raising their hands and telling something impossible to happen, and it happens.") Seeing the Virgin Mary in a water stain or Mother Teresa in a piece of pastry is not impressive. Nor is glossolalia, not even if it really sounds like a language. And faith healing, or people being "slain in the Spirit" and toppling over, owes more to showmanship and the placebo effect used on eager-to-please individuals that have been worked up into highly excitable, suggestible states. (Now, if faith healers could restore severed limbs...)
People's conversion stories.
I'm not interested in the testimonials of people who converted to a religion, not even if they used to be atheists. Everyone has moments of weakness in which emotion overrides logic. Instead of telling me how fast a religion is growing, how much of a difference it's made in people's lives, or how devoted its converts are, let those converts explain what logic and evidence persuaded them to join in the first place. If they can't do this, their stories will not affect me. After all, for obvious reasons, atheists are almost never the sort of people who go along with the crowd.
Any subjective experience.
Saying "I know God exists because I can feel him in my heart" or something similar will not affect me. Most arguments of this sort rest on the assumption that a person cannot have a completely convincing subjective experience and be mistaken regarding its cause, but a look at the diversity of world religions easily disproves this. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists - members of all faiths claim to have had convincing subjective experiences of the truth of that faith. Obviously, they cannot all be right. Why should an atheist accept any one of these testimonies as more valid than any other?
The Bible Code or similar numerological feats.
Using the same algorithms employed by the Bible Code numerologists, skeptics have been able to find assassinations and other historical events "predicted" in Moby Dick, War and Peace and other works of fiction that don't claim divine inspiration, so don't expect it to impress me.
Creationism of any sort.
I'm thoroughly familiar with the pseudoscience practiced by advocates of "scientific creationism" or "intelligent design". If you attempt to prove God's existence to me by listing the evidence for a young earth, more likely than not you'll be disappointed. (Though I'm always happy to debate the merits of evolution.)
See it all here. Thanks Plekanhov
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."
But that's just not true as there are lots of things which could convince me to believe in a god and so far as I can tell the same applies to most other atheists.
In fact some atheists (in this case the excellent Ebon) even go to the trouble of drawing up lists of the kinds of things which would convince them in the hope that it will improve the quality of the emails theists send them:
The Theist's Guide to Converting Atheists
What would convince an atheist that a religion is true?
In several years of debating atheism and theism, I have made an observation. Ask any believer what would convince him he was mistaken and persuade him to leave his religion and become an atheist, and if you get a response, it will almost invariably be, "Nothing - I have faith in my god." Although such people may well exist, I personally have yet to meet a theist who would acknowledge even the possibility that his belief was in error. Many theists, by their own admission, structure their beliefs so that no evidence could possibly disprove them. In short, they are closed-minded, and have been taught to be closed-minded. (For more on this, see "Thoughts in Captivity".)
In light of this, it is ironic that atheists are often accused of being the closed-minded ones. Fundamentalist proselytizers very frequently claim that we are hard-hearted, that we are dogmatic and irrational, that we reject God based on preconceived bias, and so on. Such claims result from psychological projection. Incapable of coping with the fact that there are some people who genuinely do not believe in their god, these theists simply deny that such people exist, and instead insist that everyone thinks the same way they do. Therefore, people who reach different conclusions than them must have some secret ulterior motive for not believing. This is truly ridiculous, but unfortunately, some people really believe it.
Thus, in the spirit of proving that atheists' minds are not closed, I've assembled below a list of everything I can think of that I would accept as proof that a given religion is true. Also included are things that I would accept as circumstantial evidence of a particular religion's truth and things that would not be acceptable to me as proof of anything. While I do not claim to speak for all atheists, I would confidently say that any religion that could produce one of the things from the first list would probably gain a great number of converts.
The first category deals with things that would absolutely convince me of the truth of a particular religion. If shown any of these, I would convert on the spot.
Verified, specific prophecies that couldn't have been contrived.
If the Bible, for example, said, "On the first day of the first month in the year two thousand and ten, the pillars of the earth will shake and a great part of the New World will be lost to the sea," and then January 1, 2010 comes and a tremendous earthquake sends California to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, I would become a believer. No points are awarded under any of the following conditions:
If the prophecy is vague, unclear or garbled (like Nostradamus' ramblings, for example). It must be detailed, specific and unambiguous in its prediction and wording.
If the prophecy is trivial. Anyone could predict that it will be cold next winter, or that this drought/plague/flood will eventually subside. The prophecy must predict something surprising, unlikely or unique.
If the prophecy is obviously contrived for other reasons. No official seer or court astrologer ever predicted that the king he worked for would be a brutal, evil tyrant who would ruin the country.
If the prophecy is self-fulfilling; i.e., if the mere fact of the prophecy's existence could cause people to make it come true. The Jewish people returned to their homeland in Israel just as the Bible said they would, but this isn't a genuine prediction - they did it because the Bible said they would. The predicted event can't be one that people could stage.
If the prophecy predicts an event that already happened and the writing of the prophecy itself can't be shown to have preceded the event.
If the prophecy predicts an event that already happened and the happening of that event can't be verified by independent evidence. For example, Christian apologists claim that Jesus fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies, but the authors of the New Testament obviously had access to those prophecies also; what would have prevented them from writing their story to conform to them? The extra-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus is so scanty that it is impossible to disprove such a proposal.
And finally, if the prophecy is the lone success among a thousand failures. Anyone can throw prophecies against the wall until one sticks. The book or other source from which it comes must have at least a decently good record on other predictions.
These conditions, I think, are eminently reasonable, and are only what would be expected of a true prophet with a genuine gift.
Scientific knowledge in holy books that wasn't available at the time.
If the Bible (or any other religious text) contained some piece of knowledge that the people of the time couldn't possibly have known but that is now known to be true, that would be highly convincing to me. A passage about the atomic theory of matter or the heliocentric solar system would be interesting, but not conclusive, since the Greeks, for example, proposed those ideas long ago independent of any claim to divine revelation.
A mention of the theory of evolution would have been impressive. A reference to the germ theory of disease, or the laws of electromagnetics, would have been compelling. But what would be indisputable proof would be an elucidation of a truly modern theory of physics, such as relativity or quantum mechanics - not just something that the people of the time couldn't possibly have known of, but something so counter-intuitive that the odds against guessing at it correctly would be staggering. Just think: What if Jesus had said something like this?
"Verily, verily, I say unto thee that thine energy is as thine mass times the speed of light multiplied unto itself."
Of course people of the time would have been baffled, but just imagine how many souls it would have saved today. As with the prophecy item, there must be independent verification that the piece of knowledge was written in texts that existed well before it was actually discovered by science.
Miraculous occurrences, especially if brought about through prayer.
If cities condemned as sinful by preachers tended to explode in flames for no apparent reason, if glowing auras of holy light sometimes appeared around believers to protect them from harm, or if atheists and only atheists were regularly struck by lightning, this would be compelling proof. But it wouldn't have to be so dramatic; even minor but objectively verifiable miracles would do, especially if they could be invoked by prayer. If a hospital did a double-blind study to determine if intercessory prayer helps the sick, and it was discovered that only the patients prayed for by members of a certain religion experienced a dramatic, statistically significant increase in recovery rate, and this result could be repeated and confirmed, I would convert. This one shouldn't be so hard, especially for the Christians - after all, Jesus told them that they would be able to work miracles through prayer!
Any direct manifestation of the divine.
I'm not that hard to convert; I'll be happy to believe in God if he tells me to in person, as long as he does it in such a way that I could be sure that it was not a hallucination (for example, in the presence of multiple reliable witnesses, none of which are in a highly emotional or otherwise altered state). Where are the voices speaking out of burning bushes, or out of thin air when people get baptized? In Old Testament times, Moses saw God so often that he knew him on a first-name basis. Why doesn't this happen any more today?
Aliens who believed in the exact same religion.
And one more, though this one is just a bit off the wall. If humanity was to contact an extraterrestrial civilization, and if said extraterrestrials had a religion that was exactly like some religion on Earth, I would become a believer. (Though it would raise some interesting theological problems for Christians. Does Jesus have to travel to every planet in the universe individually, dying and being resurrected on each one?)
The second category deals with things that would not be conclusive, but that would count as circumstantial evidence. Show me one of these and I might not convert right away, but your religion will look a lot better to me.
A genuinely flawless and consistent holy book.
True inerrancy is, so to speak, the holy grail of theism. Almost every religion claims their scripture is perfect, but none that I know of have actually met this exacting standard; I have yet to read a holy text entirely without error or self-contradiction. A book that was free of such problems would be circumstantial evidence in favor of the religion that possessed it, but not compelling, since this is still explicable as the result of purely human forces.
A religion without internal disputes or factions.
It seems reasonable to expect that, if there existed a god that was interested in revealing itself to humanity and desired that we follow its commands, that god would write down whatever instructions it had to give us in a way that was only amenable to one interpretation. Thus, if a religion was true, we might expect that no factions or sects would form within it and all members of that religion would speak with one voice regarding ethical and theological issues. Why the alternative scenario should ever hold for an inspired religion is not clear. Did God intend to communicate his message clearly but failed to do so? However, since this could still be the result of human influence, it would only be circumstantial, not conclusive, evidence in favor of a given religion's truth.
A religion whose followers have never committed or taken part in atrocities.
If a given religion's sacred text consistently promotes peace, compassion and nonviolence, and if that religion's history reflects that fact, that religion would look much more attractive to me. Historically, almost every religion that has ever had the power to do so has persecuted those who believed differently, and I do not think it likely that a morally good deity would allow his chosen faith's good name to be smeared by evil and fallible humans.
A religion that had a consistent record of winning its jihads and holy wars.
Strangely, none do. One can only wonder why.
The final category deals with things that would not convince me; none of the following would persuade me to rethink my position. To date, all the evidence I have ever seen presented for any religion falls into this category.
Speaking in tongues or other pseudo-miracles.
To convince me, a miracle would have to be genuine, verifiable, and represent a real and inexplicable divergence from the ordinary. Anything that can be explained by peer pressure, the power of suggestion or the placebo effect does not count. Favorable coincidences or kind or courageous acts performed by human beings also do not meet this standard. (This post clearly illuminates the difference: "Biblical miracles aren't about accidents and people saying 'Whew, that was close.' Biblical miracles are people raising their hands and telling something impossible to happen, and it happens.") Seeing the Virgin Mary in a water stain or Mother Teresa in a piece of pastry is not impressive. Nor is glossolalia, not even if it really sounds like a language. And faith healing, or people being "slain in the Spirit" and toppling over, owes more to showmanship and the placebo effect used on eager-to-please individuals that have been worked up into highly excitable, suggestible states. (Now, if faith healers could restore severed limbs...)
People's conversion stories.
I'm not interested in the testimonials of people who converted to a religion, not even if they used to be atheists. Everyone has moments of weakness in which emotion overrides logic. Instead of telling me how fast a religion is growing, how much of a difference it's made in people's lives, or how devoted its converts are, let those converts explain what logic and evidence persuaded them to join in the first place. If they can't do this, their stories will not affect me. After all, for obvious reasons, atheists are almost never the sort of people who go along with the crowd.
Any subjective experience.
Saying "I know God exists because I can feel him in my heart" or something similar will not affect me. Most arguments of this sort rest on the assumption that a person cannot have a completely convincing subjective experience and be mistaken regarding its cause, but a look at the diversity of world religions easily disproves this. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists - members of all faiths claim to have had convincing subjective experiences of the truth of that faith. Obviously, they cannot all be right. Why should an atheist accept any one of these testimonies as more valid than any other?
The Bible Code or similar numerological feats.
Using the same algorithms employed by the Bible Code numerologists, skeptics have been able to find assassinations and other historical events "predicted" in Moby Dick, War and Peace and other works of fiction that don't claim divine inspiration, so don't expect it to impress me.
Creationism of any sort.
I'm thoroughly familiar with the pseudoscience practiced by advocates of "scientific creationism" or "intelligent design". If you attempt to prove God's existence to me by listing the evidence for a young earth, more likely than not you'll be disappointed. (Though I'm always happy to debate the merits of evolution.)
See it all here. Thanks Plekanhov
10 October 2010
A little bit about me.
I lost my faith before I was a teen despite the Old Testament being told to me at infant school as if it were fact and my Mother telling me the stories about Samson and Daniel. My Father told me about George and the Dragon too, only in his version, the dragon wasn’t there at the first time of calling so George retired to the pub. Years later, I understood why the student teacher had insisted I tell my story once more when the class teacher returned. It is fascinating how we order our world as young children, perhaps even more fascinating when we invoke invisible magic friends to give it order when we are adults.
I wasn’t brought up in a faith other than at school. My parents were Christians in the loosest sense of the word. My Father, a scrap metal dealer, had more fiddles going than you would find in Dublin on St Patrick’s Night. Indeed, he was arrested on bonfire night back in 1974 and charged with fraud. He made the front page of the local paper. The case collapsed.
I had a ‘vision’ one night during my sleep that pushed me back towards faith for a few months but by my teens, it really was all finished. At 15 I wrote to the local paper to complain about the legislation that required a ‘collective act of worship’ in schools, every day. They dispatched a photographer to take my picture and I was published for the first time. That put paid to my under-age drinking for a time. A week later and the replies were printed. I was slated. One comment that is etched into my mind is’ “One only has to look at the beautiful trees and birds to know there is a god”. Another is, “I blame all the shameful sex and violence we see and hear on TV”.
Aged 17, I was given a book to read, ‘Another Roadside Attraction’ by Tom Robbins. He did theology and the book was about finding The Source, via the Vatican catacombs and the body of Jesus which was found there. Soon after this I had dated a student of Politics, Philosophy and Economics who was at Oxford. Scary as it was, it broke my ‘Large City’ mentality and I ended up moving to an even larger city and mixing with some extraordinary people, not afraid to speak their minds.
So at 19, I was having regular sex, had a brilliant social life and knew that there was no purpose or meaning to our lives other than what we chose to give it. There was no deity, no reward in heaven, no nothing just an awareness of this amazing opportunity that had been given to me to ‘walk this way but once’ despite astounding odds against. Bill Bryson says it so well in his book ‘The Brief History of Time’.
Fast forward several bad relationship choices, a wife, three children, a further wife and two additional step children and we have arrived at the present. Just for the record, I let my oldest two girls be taken to church by their Grandma and didn’t make my views known until I was asked directly. Their mother was agnostic at best, a believer of ‘something’ at worst. Both girls (now 19 and 17) are atheists and both are lesbians. I doubt there is any correlation there but I know they don’t feel any guilt about their sexuality.
My son is quite gifted at maths. He is too logical to believe in macic. His teachers told him that he had to sing hymns in ‘religious assembly’. I told him he didn’t as it was an infringement on his human rights. Don’t you just love the Human Rights Act?
Anyway, since the internet put me in touch with like-minded people and I could watch videos and hone my thoughts, I have become an anti-theist. I now see religion as a disease.
The main Abrahamic faiths are convinced that theirs is the ‘one true faith’ and with that assumed territory comes at best, the teaching of creationist stupidity on schools and at worst, the mass slaughter of innocents. That is why I and many others get angry. We don’t want people who are incapable of understanding the process of scientific theory, but are willing to cherry pick the ‘scientific facts’ that support their crazy assertions, being able to force their views on others, particularly if those ‘others’ are children expecting to be educated.
The English Defence League was protesting in the Midlands yesterday. They don’t like Islam very much and they have racist affiliations. People were out in force to demonstrate their loathing for such tactics. However when a bishop, priest, pastor, preacher or whatever tells their followers that gays are abhorrent to society, women are second class citizens and contraception will not be tolerated, people seem to accept this as the norm rather than getting out there to take them on.
This may be changing with the ‘Protest the Pope’ demonstrations despite the media colluding to present the protector of rapists in a good light. The more we anti-theists become organised, the more we will take-head on the messages of condemnation, the bullying and the discrimiation that emanates from the pulpits of our green and not so pleasant land. How can people take them seriously when they are dressed in their finery and dictating morals to us? What gross act would the church have to do for people to finally turn their backs on it?
I think the idea of randomness and no meaning are so scary to so many people that they will cling on to their faith at any cost. A friend of my wife admitted as much when we were discussing the mass genocides that the god of the Old Testament had sanctioned. She said that even if God had been directly responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, she would still believe in him as she could not imagine an alternative.
Go to church. Ask questions, challenge, heckle if needs be. We do it to politicians and some of them actually talk sense.
As PZ Myres said this week;
“We need to address the disease. And if you're one of those people trying to defend superstition and quivering in fear at the idea of taking on a majority that believes in foolishness, urging us to continue slapping bandages on the blight of faith, well then, you're part of the problem and we'll probably do something utterly dreadful, like be rude to you or write some cutting sarcastic essay to mock your position. That is our métier, after all.
There is another motive for our confrontational ways, and it has to do with values. We talk a lot about values in this country, so I kind of hate to use the word -- it's been tainted by the religious right, which howls about "Christian values" every time the subject of civil rights for gays or equal rights for women or universal health care or improving the plight of the poor come up -- True Christian values are agin' those things, after all. But the Gnu Atheists have values, too, and premiere among them is truth. And that makes us uncivil and rude, because we challenge the truth of religion.“
Like him, I am unable to compromise on reality.
“It's all about the truth, people. And all the evidence is crystal clear right now: the earth is far older than 6,000 years. Evolution is a real, and it is a process built on raw chance driven by the brutal engines of selection, and there is no sign of a loving, personal god, but only billions of years of pitiless winnowing without any direction other than short-term survival and reproduction. It's not pretty, it's not consoling, it doesn't sanctify virginity, or tell you that god really loves your foreskin, but it's got one soaring virtue that trumps all the others: it's true.”
I’m pleased I got that little lot off my chest.
I wasn’t brought up in a faith other than at school. My parents were Christians in the loosest sense of the word. My Father, a scrap metal dealer, had more fiddles going than you would find in Dublin on St Patrick’s Night. Indeed, he was arrested on bonfire night back in 1974 and charged with fraud. He made the front page of the local paper. The case collapsed.
I had a ‘vision’ one night during my sleep that pushed me back towards faith for a few months but by my teens, it really was all finished. At 15 I wrote to the local paper to complain about the legislation that required a ‘collective act of worship’ in schools, every day. They dispatched a photographer to take my picture and I was published for the first time. That put paid to my under-age drinking for a time. A week later and the replies were printed. I was slated. One comment that is etched into my mind is’ “One only has to look at the beautiful trees and birds to know there is a god”. Another is, “I blame all the shameful sex and violence we see and hear on TV”.
Aged 17, I was given a book to read, ‘Another Roadside Attraction’ by Tom Robbins. He did theology and the book was about finding The Source, via the Vatican catacombs and the body of Jesus which was found there. Soon after this I had dated a student of Politics, Philosophy and Economics who was at Oxford. Scary as it was, it broke my ‘Large City’ mentality and I ended up moving to an even larger city and mixing with some extraordinary people, not afraid to speak their minds.
So at 19, I was having regular sex, had a brilliant social life and knew that there was no purpose or meaning to our lives other than what we chose to give it. There was no deity, no reward in heaven, no nothing just an awareness of this amazing opportunity that had been given to me to ‘walk this way but once’ despite astounding odds against. Bill Bryson says it so well in his book ‘The Brief History of Time’.
Fast forward several bad relationship choices, a wife, three children, a further wife and two additional step children and we have arrived at the present. Just for the record, I let my oldest two girls be taken to church by their Grandma and didn’t make my views known until I was asked directly. Their mother was agnostic at best, a believer of ‘something’ at worst. Both girls (now 19 and 17) are atheists and both are lesbians. I doubt there is any correlation there but I know they don’t feel any guilt about their sexuality.
My son is quite gifted at maths. He is too logical to believe in macic. His teachers told him that he had to sing hymns in ‘religious assembly’. I told him he didn’t as it was an infringement on his human rights. Don’t you just love the Human Rights Act?
Anyway, since the internet put me in touch with like-minded people and I could watch videos and hone my thoughts, I have become an anti-theist. I now see religion as a disease.
The main Abrahamic faiths are convinced that theirs is the ‘one true faith’ and with that assumed territory comes at best, the teaching of creationist stupidity on schools and at worst, the mass slaughter of innocents. That is why I and many others get angry. We don’t want people who are incapable of understanding the process of scientific theory, but are willing to cherry pick the ‘scientific facts’ that support their crazy assertions, being able to force their views on others, particularly if those ‘others’ are children expecting to be educated.
The English Defence League was protesting in the Midlands yesterday. They don’t like Islam very much and they have racist affiliations. People were out in force to demonstrate their loathing for such tactics. However when a bishop, priest, pastor, preacher or whatever tells their followers that gays are abhorrent to society, women are second class citizens and contraception will not be tolerated, people seem to accept this as the norm rather than getting out there to take them on.
This may be changing with the ‘Protest the Pope’ demonstrations despite the media colluding to present the protector of rapists in a good light. The more we anti-theists become organised, the more we will take-head on the messages of condemnation, the bullying and the discrimiation that emanates from the pulpits of our green and not so pleasant land. How can people take them seriously when they are dressed in their finery and dictating morals to us? What gross act would the church have to do for people to finally turn their backs on it?
I think the idea of randomness and no meaning are so scary to so many people that they will cling on to their faith at any cost. A friend of my wife admitted as much when we were discussing the mass genocides that the god of the Old Testament had sanctioned. She said that even if God had been directly responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, she would still believe in him as she could not imagine an alternative.
Go to church. Ask questions, challenge, heckle if needs be. We do it to politicians and some of them actually talk sense.
As PZ Myres said this week;
“We need to address the disease. And if you're one of those people trying to defend superstition and quivering in fear at the idea of taking on a majority that believes in foolishness, urging us to continue slapping bandages on the blight of faith, well then, you're part of the problem and we'll probably do something utterly dreadful, like be rude to you or write some cutting sarcastic essay to mock your position. That is our métier, after all.
There is another motive for our confrontational ways, and it has to do with values. We talk a lot about values in this country, so I kind of hate to use the word -- it's been tainted by the religious right, which howls about "Christian values" every time the subject of civil rights for gays or equal rights for women or universal health care or improving the plight of the poor come up -- True Christian values are agin' those things, after all. But the Gnu Atheists have values, too, and premiere among them is truth. And that makes us uncivil and rude, because we challenge the truth of religion.“
Like him, I am unable to compromise on reality.
“It's all about the truth, people. And all the evidence is crystal clear right now: the earth is far older than 6,000 years. Evolution is a real, and it is a process built on raw chance driven by the brutal engines of selection, and there is no sign of a loving, personal god, but only billions of years of pitiless winnowing without any direction other than short-term survival and reproduction. It's not pretty, it's not consoling, it doesn't sanctify virginity, or tell you that god really loves your foreskin, but it's got one soaring virtue that trumps all the others: it's true.”
I’m pleased I got that little lot off my chest.
6 September 2010
My request to indoctrinate in Rotherham Town Centre
From: Bloom1
Sent: 21 August 2010 16:40
To: info@rotherhamtowncentre.co.uk
Subject: Event on Saturday 21 August in Town Centre
Hi Rotherham Town Centre
I am writing to enquire about hiring a spot in Rotherham town centre. I see you had a full blown gospel outfit there today making lots of noise and preaching about they found Jesus. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to hang around for too long as it was a bit on the loud side and hearing is not good at the best of times.
Are any religious groups allowed book a slot to do this? I feel that the issue of religion is not being addressed in the way that it should and would love to put on a similar event so that my congregation can become more proactive in putting the important messages to people who may not have read or fully understood the Bible. As you may be aware, this holy book on which our Country’s faith was built, condemns homosexuality as a sin and has clear messages about how women should behave what should happen to people who worship false idols. We feel that there is not enough contemplation given to these issues in the modern age. We also have t-shirts and balloons and our own public address system and are ready to roll.
Would you please let me know how I can secure a booking and what paperwork I need to fill in. Can it be done online? I appreciate that you may have to give equal space to the different denominations of Christianity, the other Abrahamic faiths and various other ‘groups’ that have a different god but I hope we will be able to arrange something before the end of the Summer.
Yours hopefully
Mr Bloom.
Dear Mr. Bloom
Thank you for your email and interest in holding an event in Rotherham town centre. May I suggest for us to arrange a meeting to discuss the type of event you wish to hold and whether it would be feasible. The Events & Promotions team who would deal with the event are currently organising the Rotherham Show so will be unavailable until afterwards. Therefore could you confirm your availability for w/c 13th September. I realise this is a few weeks away but the team need a reasonable lead-in period and the show is a priority at the moment. In the meantime please complete the attached application form and email, fax to 01709 837953 or post to: Retail Investment Team, 5th Floor, Phoenix Business Centre, 18 High Street, Rotherham, S60 1PP.
If you need any further information, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards
Catherine
________________________________________
Sent: 21 August 2010 16:40
To: info@rotherhamtowncentre.co.uk
Subject: Event on Saturday 21 August in Town Centre
Hi Rotherham Town Centre
I am writing to enquire about hiring a spot in Rotherham town centre. I see you had a full blown gospel outfit there today making lots of noise and preaching about they found Jesus. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to hang around for too long as it was a bit on the loud side and hearing is not good at the best of times.
Are any religious groups allowed book a slot to do this? I feel that the issue of religion is not being addressed in the way that it should and would love to put on a similar event so that my congregation can become more proactive in putting the important messages to people who may not have read or fully understood the Bible. As you may be aware, this holy book on which our Country’s faith was built, condemns homosexuality as a sin and has clear messages about how women should behave what should happen to people who worship false idols. We feel that there is not enough contemplation given to these issues in the modern age. We also have t-shirts and balloons and our own public address system and are ready to roll.
Would you please let me know how I can secure a booking and what paperwork I need to fill in. Can it be done online? I appreciate that you may have to give equal space to the different denominations of Christianity, the other Abrahamic faiths and various other ‘groups’ that have a different god but I hope we will be able to arrange something before the end of the Summer.
Yours hopefully
Mr Bloom.
Dear Mr. Bloom
Thank you for your email and interest in holding an event in Rotherham town centre. May I suggest for us to arrange a meeting to discuss the type of event you wish to hold and whether it would be feasible. The Events & Promotions team who would deal with the event are currently organising the Rotherham Show so will be unavailable until afterwards. Therefore could you confirm your availability for w/c 13th September. I realise this is a few weeks away but the team need a reasonable lead-in period and the show is a priority at the moment. In the meantime please complete the attached application form and email, fax to 01709 837953 or post to: Retail Investment Team, 5th Floor, Phoenix Business Centre, 18 High Street, Rotherham, S60 1PP.
If you need any further information, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards
Catherine
________________________________________
21 August 2010
Celebrating Faith in open spaces in built-up areas
I knew as I approached the town centre that the sound snaking its way through the streets could only mean one thing. Someone had let a gospel choir loose in the centre of town. I was not wrong. There were lots of them dancing around, some dressed up and some in T-shirts proclaiming god. The PA system was unbearably loud and I felt sorry for the poor people working in shops that had to endure this.
It was too loud even for me to try and shout back. I wish I could have asked for the microphome so that I caould have asked them a few questions about their saviour. I am really annoyed that Rotherham metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC) would allow minority groupd to preach like this. Having a few stalls that people can wander over to is one thing but very loud "In your face" gospel salvation?
There were plenty of people about who I made an informed guess were muslim and there were a few people sat around in the square taking it in but most people were going on their way getting on with whatever people do in Rotherham town centre.
I wish I could have done a little delving by asking what their views were on homosexuality and other choice nuggets from their holy book but I had my kid and his friend with me and I just wasn't prepared.
Anyway, here is the hasty prepared email that I sent off to RMBC Town Centre Team. I am connected through my work. Should be interesting to see what I get back.
Hi Rotherham Town Centre
I am writing to enquire about hiring a spot in Rotherham town centre. I see you had a full blown gospel outfit there today making lots of noise and preaching about they found Jesus. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to hang around for too long as it was a bit on the loud side and hearing is not good at the best of times.
Are any religious groups allowed book a slot to do this? I feel that the issue of religion is not being addressed in the way that it should and would love to put on a similar event so that my congregation can become more proactive in putting the important messages to people who may not have read or fully understood the Bible. As you may be aware, this holy book on which our Country’s faith was built, condemns homosexuality as a sin and has clear messages about how women should behave what should happen to people who worship false idols. We feel that there is not enough contemplation given to these issues in the modern age. We also have t-shirts and balloons and our own public address system and are ready to roll.
Would you please let me know how I can secure a booking and what paperwork I need to fill in. Can it be done online? I appreciate that you may have to give equal space to the different denominations of Christianity, the other Abrahamic faiths and various other ‘groups’ that have a different god but I hope we will be able to arrange something before the end of the Summer.
Yours hopefully
Mr Bloom.
It was too loud even for me to try and shout back. I wish I could have asked for the microphome so that I caould have asked them a few questions about their saviour. I am really annoyed that Rotherham metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC) would allow minority groupd to preach like this. Having a few stalls that people can wander over to is one thing but very loud "In your face" gospel salvation?
There were plenty of people about who I made an informed guess were muslim and there were a few people sat around in the square taking it in but most people were going on their way getting on with whatever people do in Rotherham town centre.
I wish I could have done a little delving by asking what their views were on homosexuality and other choice nuggets from their holy book but I had my kid and his friend with me and I just wasn't prepared.
Anyway, here is the hasty prepared email that I sent off to RMBC Town Centre Team. I am connected through my work. Should be interesting to see what I get back.
Hi Rotherham Town Centre
I am writing to enquire about hiring a spot in Rotherham town centre. I see you had a full blown gospel outfit there today making lots of noise and preaching about they found Jesus. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to hang around for too long as it was a bit on the loud side and hearing is not good at the best of times.
Are any religious groups allowed book a slot to do this? I feel that the issue of religion is not being addressed in the way that it should and would love to put on a similar event so that my congregation can become more proactive in putting the important messages to people who may not have read or fully understood the Bible. As you may be aware, this holy book on which our Country’s faith was built, condemns homosexuality as a sin and has clear messages about how women should behave what should happen to people who worship false idols. We feel that there is not enough contemplation given to these issues in the modern age. We also have t-shirts and balloons and our own public address system and are ready to roll.
Would you please let me know how I can secure a booking and what paperwork I need to fill in. Can it be done online? I appreciate that you may have to give equal space to the different denominations of Christianity, the other Abrahamic faiths and various other ‘groups’ that have a different god but I hope we will be able to arrange something before the end of the Summer.
Yours hopefully
Mr Bloom.
25 July 2010
Muslim gorefest of women murdered in allah's name.
Sickening barbarity. How can it happen in a civilised world?
Protest the Pope
So the police are gearing up to monitor any threats to Benny's visit in September. Story here. I was thinking of a few things that I could arrange.
How about a few of us taking a slow drive down the M6 when he is in Coventry?
Or we could buy a job lot of shop mannequins like these 9-11 year olds and wander round town with them dressed as chiorboys.
We could get dressed up in the full bishop regalia, although the staff may be construed as an offensive weapon, or we could all be pope benny look-alikes for the day. I think dressing as hitler youth may be a bit in bad taste. What about being a Swiss Guard for the day?
As the main threat appears to be perceived as coming from Islam, perhaps we should dress up in flowing robes and burkas and mingle with the crowds. We could keep our usual clothes in a backpack for easy access.
Anyone got any other ideas? I will drop the police a line just to check that we aren't doing anything illegal, after all it is 'me old mucker' Meredydd, speed king extrordinaire, who is running the show.
How about a few of us taking a slow drive down the M6 when he is in Coventry?
Or we could buy a job lot of shop mannequins like these 9-11 year olds and wander round town with them dressed as chiorboys.
We could get dressed up in the full bishop regalia, although the staff may be construed as an offensive weapon, or we could all be pope benny look-alikes for the day. I think dressing as hitler youth may be a bit in bad taste. What about being a Swiss Guard for the day?
As the main threat appears to be perceived as coming from Islam, perhaps we should dress up in flowing robes and burkas and mingle with the crowds. We could keep our usual clothes in a backpack for easy access.
Anyone got any other ideas? I will drop the police a line just to check that we aren't doing anything illegal, after all it is 'me old mucker' Meredydd, speed king extrordinaire, who is running the show.
5 July 2010
Beatifying John Henry
I thought they were going to 'Beautify' John Henry Newman when the Pope pops over in September, like give him vouchers to get a spray tan, a facial, remove his nose and ear hair and get a good haircut that won't scare young children, then have a picture taken and hung in a cathedral somewhere.
However, I notice on the BBC News that the word is 'Beatify'. What does that involve then? I have never heard of anyone being beatified before. Will it hurt? Does it involve a rythm?
Personally, I would have gone for John Henry Bonham to receive the accolade. He was from around the West Midlands as well and did a lot more than write a few books and convet from anglicism to catholicism. Just listen to the riff he lays down in 'Kashmir' and the bass pedal triplets in 'Good Times, Bad Times' and tell me he doesn't deserve to be beatified. No-one could play just behind the beat like Mr Bonham.
However, I notice on the BBC News that the word is 'Beatify'. What does that involve then? I have never heard of anyone being beatified before. Will it hurt? Does it involve a rythm?
Personally, I would have gone for John Henry Bonham to receive the accolade. He was from around the West Midlands as well and did a lot more than write a few books and convet from anglicism to catholicism. Just listen to the riff he lays down in 'Kashmir' and the bass pedal triplets in 'Good Times, Bad Times' and tell me he doesn't deserve to be beatified. No-one could play just behind the beat like Mr Bonham.
28 June 2010
Lesbian Virgin Mary to appear in Austin.
I receied this invitation from my pal at America Needs Fatima. You would think that God would be able to stand his own corner if he was upset about his teenage virgin mother being portrayed as a carpet muncher. Perhaps he could rain some hellfire on the theatre or smite the director but no, he does nothing while mere mortals take offence and do protest too much. wish I could be there but it's a long way to go.
Dear Philip G,
If you live in the Austin area (TX), or know someone who does, there will be a peaceful, public act of reparation on Saturday, July 3rd at 7:30 PM for the blasphemous insults to Our Lady at the City Theater.
The peaceful protest of reparation will consist of praying the rosary and offering prayers of reparation for the blasphemous play, "The Most Fabulous Story Ever Told."
As you may know, this play offends God-fearing people in general and Catholics in particular by referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary as a lesbian.
"I wanted the G a r d e n of Eden in Central Park, and Mary as a lesbian mother, which would certainly help me comprehend immaculate conception." (The New York Times, 12/6/98)
It is also presents a homosexual version of the Bible, with scenes of "Adam and Steve" in full frontal n u d i t y.
When: Saturday, July 3rd at 7:30 PM.
Where: The City Theater
3823 Air port Blvd., Suite D
Austin, TX 78722
Why: To do reparation
INVITATION
Attendees are welcome to bring signs and/or banners as long as they fall in line with the message of the Catholic Faith. Lastly, attendees must not block traffic or impede anyone from entering/exiting any of the businesses in the area, including the t h e a t r e.
Also, please pray for the City of Austin and Travis County Texas which continue to publicly fund abortions and recently passed an ordinance that effectively harasses crisis pregnancy centers in the City of Austin.
The local faithful are hoping the new Bishop of the Austin, his Excellency Joe Vasquez will consecrate the City of Austin to The Immaculate Heart of Mary.
For additional information on the Protest of Reparation please contact Kenneth Mora:
(512) 282-8537.
Kenneth is coordinating this important public act of reparation. He is one of Our Lady’s devotees.
For the love of Our Lady, please help him in this vital spiritual crusade.
Thank you.
Sincerely in Jesus and Mary,
Robert E. Ritchie
America Needs Fatima
www.ANF.org
P.S. Also, please send your instant e-protest message to the
City T h e a t r e in Austin to register your peaceful protest at a play that refers to Our Lady as a lesbian! Thank you!
27 June 2010
Conversation with a believer
Hey Philip G, thanks for taking the time to drop by in such a small humble blog to comment. Appreciate you and your comments. Keep them coming.
There is always this debate to ask the people of any faith to show proof of the existence of “their” God. It is always based on evidence, “show me then I will believe”. Of course, it makes so much sense to do that.
Let me go on…
The question is how can faith be a real experience and not just a figment of imagination?
Through our lives, day in and day out, even the most mundane of things. It’s just not all about preaching, evangelism party to “convert” people, or bible studies. It is also about lending a listening ear to a friend to show concern, being with a person who has just lost his loved one’s, in other words, showing love in the most tangible of ways, not just through words, but through mouth.
You need a god to be considerate to others?
The faith must be experienced through our hearts, not through the logics in our minds.
Faith and logic are not good bedfellows.
So, with this common question, “show me a proof of your God” can be easily answered with a question in return, “show me a proof He doesn’t exist?”
I don’t have to prove a negative. Do I need to prove that the Earth is not flat, that fairies don’t live at the bottom of the garden, that Allah is not the one true god?
The debate of logics and philosophy can go on and on, but the end of day, how do we live our lives, are we missing something in our lives, how’s your relationship with your family members, those kind of questions which is far more important.
My relationship with my family members is pretty rubbish at the moment. Are you saying it would be better if I believed in your god?
If you can live life to the fullest without God, why not? That is your personal choice. There is no criticism on that and trying to ‘coax’ you to believe something that u are missing something.
It’s a personal thing. Faith is personal. And, you can never take away the personal experience from anyone else no matter how ridiculous it may sound to the skeptics. It’s personal. Period.
Personal experience can be imagined. Anyone who believes in an invisible magic friend is deluded. God rarely seems to talk to groups of people or do anything to prove his existence. What would be different if he vanished?
But, through the lives of Christians who are imperfect in every way, we can honestly tell you, there is so much more to life when God is in the picture, in the center of our lives, so much more.
You would say that. “Imperfect in every way”. Strange choice of words. Is your god perfect? I think not. He is a lesser god in my book for all sorts of reasons. Visit my blog to read more on this.
Accepting Jesus is a personal choice. Believing Him is a personal choice. We are not going to even try to debate with you or for that matter, anyone else, about the existence of God, of why bad things happened if there is a God, because it is kinda pointless.
Indeed. Bad things happen because bad things happen. There is no meaning or ‘fate’.
Let’s say you win the debate. It still would not change the way we live our lives where we know and believe that we are meant to live with God in our lives, where we find purpose and meaning, not just for the sake of going heaven u know.
Heaven is the last place I would want to go. Do you understand the concept of eternity?
Le’s say we (Christian) win the debate. It still would not change the way you live your life or change your perception because in your heart you already make up your mind to not believe anyway.
I take drugs, drink too much, swear, covet my neighbour’s ox, support my local community, do voluntary work and try to ‘put something back’. And I’m a heathen!
There is no reason to justify our faith.
We show it. As imperfect as we are in showing it, we are trying by the grace of God, really.
What’s with the ‘perfection’ thing? Strive to get most things right most of the time, not to hurt people unnecessarily and to leave the world a slightly better place for you having walked on it. We are here but for the blink of an eye and when we are dead, we are gone for eternity.
We don’t know everything. That is why, we need God all the more.
We know much more than we did and we need god much less to explain the unknown.
There is very little that science cannot explain. God has been reduced to the ‘creator of the cosmos’ and the ‘breather of life’. He used to be do much more. Religion is dying. There are thousands of gods that were once worshipped with rivers of human blood and are now worshipped by no-one.
Cheers
Alvin Boey
There is always this debate to ask the people of any faith to show proof of the existence of “their” God. It is always based on evidence, “show me then I will believe”. Of course, it makes so much sense to do that.
Let me go on…
The question is how can faith be a real experience and not just a figment of imagination?
Through our lives, day in and day out, even the most mundane of things. It’s just not all about preaching, evangelism party to “convert” people, or bible studies. It is also about lending a listening ear to a friend to show concern, being with a person who has just lost his loved one’s, in other words, showing love in the most tangible of ways, not just through words, but through mouth.
You need a god to be considerate to others?
The faith must be experienced through our hearts, not through the logics in our minds.
Faith and logic are not good bedfellows.
So, with this common question, “show me a proof of your God” can be easily answered with a question in return, “show me a proof He doesn’t exist?”
I don’t have to prove a negative. Do I need to prove that the Earth is not flat, that fairies don’t live at the bottom of the garden, that Allah is not the one true god?
The debate of logics and philosophy can go on and on, but the end of day, how do we live our lives, are we missing something in our lives, how’s your relationship with your family members, those kind of questions which is far more important.
My relationship with my family members is pretty rubbish at the moment. Are you saying it would be better if I believed in your god?
If you can live life to the fullest without God, why not? That is your personal choice. There is no criticism on that and trying to ‘coax’ you to believe something that u are missing something.
It’s a personal thing. Faith is personal. And, you can never take away the personal experience from anyone else no matter how ridiculous it may sound to the skeptics. It’s personal. Period.
Personal experience can be imagined. Anyone who believes in an invisible magic friend is deluded. God rarely seems to talk to groups of people or do anything to prove his existence. What would be different if he vanished?
But, through the lives of Christians who are imperfect in every way, we can honestly tell you, there is so much more to life when God is in the picture, in the center of our lives, so much more.
You would say that. “Imperfect in every way”. Strange choice of words. Is your god perfect? I think not. He is a lesser god in my book for all sorts of reasons. Visit my blog to read more on this.
Accepting Jesus is a personal choice. Believing Him is a personal choice. We are not going to even try to debate with you or for that matter, anyone else, about the existence of God, of why bad things happened if there is a God, because it is kinda pointless.
Indeed. Bad things happen because bad things happen. There is no meaning or ‘fate’.
Let’s say you win the debate. It still would not change the way we live our lives where we know and believe that we are meant to live with God in our lives, where we find purpose and meaning, not just for the sake of going heaven u know.
Heaven is the last place I would want to go. Do you understand the concept of eternity?
Le’s say we (Christian) win the debate. It still would not change the way you live your life or change your perception because in your heart you already make up your mind to not believe anyway.
I take drugs, drink too much, swear, covet my neighbour’s ox, support my local community, do voluntary work and try to ‘put something back’. And I’m a heathen!
There is no reason to justify our faith.
We show it. As imperfect as we are in showing it, we are trying by the grace of God, really.
What’s with the ‘perfection’ thing? Strive to get most things right most of the time, not to hurt people unnecessarily and to leave the world a slightly better place for you having walked on it. We are here but for the blink of an eye and when we are dead, we are gone for eternity.
We don’t know everything. That is why, we need God all the more.
We know much more than we did and we need god much less to explain the unknown.
There is very little that science cannot explain. God has been reduced to the ‘creator of the cosmos’ and the ‘breather of life’. He used to be do much more. Religion is dying. There are thousands of gods that were once worshipped with rivers of human blood and are now worshipped by no-one.
Cheers
Alvin Boey
25 June 2010
Jesus will save you - not.
If someone was brought up in a controlled environment where information was filtered and they were given zero information about god, what would their belief/value system become?
Does god have a way of communicating with people or has he devolved the spiritual continuence on the parents of the child to bring said child up in said faith?
I wonder how many children who are brought up in faith A, sudenly denounce it and adopt faith B? The lack of wholescale movement to the 'one true god' suggests to me that god has no active involvement in which faith children are brought up in. This becomes an issue whern we consider that children could burn in hell for eternity if they do not accept jesus. Why is god so devolved from the process?
Jesus could have a little chat with every child when they get to 5. He could introduce himself and explain about sin, redemtion and eternal life. Instead, he leaves this to mere mortals, many of whom dress up in sily costumes and insist that their congregation eat crackers and drink wine, not a child friendly activity.
The christian faith is dying. The Anglican church is mortally wounded by the inclusion of women and the pope is nothing more than a pimp. Does anyone still beileve in the salvation of jesus?
Does god have a way of communicating with people or has he devolved the spiritual continuence on the parents of the child to bring said child up in said faith?
I wonder how many children who are brought up in faith A, sudenly denounce it and adopt faith B? The lack of wholescale movement to the 'one true god' suggests to me that god has no active involvement in which faith children are brought up in. This becomes an issue whern we consider that children could burn in hell for eternity if they do not accept jesus. Why is god so devolved from the process?
Jesus could have a little chat with every child when they get to 5. He could introduce himself and explain about sin, redemtion and eternal life. Instead, he leaves this to mere mortals, many of whom dress up in sily costumes and insist that their congregation eat crackers and drink wine, not a child friendly activity.
The christian faith is dying. The Anglican church is mortally wounded by the inclusion of women and the pope is nothing more than a pimp. Does anyone still beileve in the salvation of jesus?
20 June 2010
Does God exist?
Someone asked on my local forum, "Does God exist and if so, where is the proof? This was my response. View the thread here.
One only has to look at all the beautiful plants and trees to know that this couldn't have just happened. It needed intelligent design. What about an eye? How could that have just appeared? If a tornado hit a car breakers, it wouldn't leave an E Type in its wake.
However the designer was a bit naff. Putting sex organs next to the sewage system and indeed having them operate as both is novel but not the best design option. I know the childbitrth thing weas a curse from god but really - A hinged door over the stomach opened by a code provided by god on 9 months would be better and would save a fortune in healthcare.
Why not have parents needing to spend a year in close proximity before the female could get pregnant? That would solve a lot of social problems. Bones break too easily. A good god would have thought of this before the seventh day or would have fixed it after. If humans were bendy and could bounce from great heights, there would be a lot less to go wrong. Needing blood to carry oxygen round the body is a bit of a no-brainer. Fine until someone gets accidentally opened up or those white cells get a mind of their own.
I suppose god was a bit limited because he had to make us in his own image for some reason but hey, got to give the guy a 6 out of 10 for effort.
One only has to look at all the beautiful plants and trees to know that this couldn't have just happened. It needed intelligent design. What about an eye? How could that have just appeared? If a tornado hit a car breakers, it wouldn't leave an E Type in its wake.
However the designer was a bit naff. Putting sex organs next to the sewage system and indeed having them operate as both is novel but not the best design option. I know the childbitrth thing weas a curse from god but really - A hinged door over the stomach opened by a code provided by god on 9 months would be better and would save a fortune in healthcare.
Why not have parents needing to spend a year in close proximity before the female could get pregnant? That would solve a lot of social problems. Bones break too easily. A good god would have thought of this before the seventh day or would have fixed it after. If humans were bendy and could bounce from great heights, there would be a lot less to go wrong. Needing blood to carry oxygen round the body is a bit of a no-brainer. Fine until someone gets accidentally opened up or those white cells get a mind of their own.
I suppose god was a bit limited because he had to make us in his own image for some reason but hey, got to give the guy a 6 out of 10 for effort.
10 June 2010
The bible is the word of ..... desert dwelling fools.
The bible is a load of drivel. Ray Mears Survival Guide or Animal Husbandry by Jethro Tull would have served people better. Where is the wisdom of god in the bible? He is all powerful and it just talks about boat building and who begat who. Is that all he wanted people to know? Where is he now when things are really hotting up? He could sort out the BP oil leak without even breaking wind but he does nothing. Why, because he is a figment of your imagination you dumb twat.
I posted this on someone's blog and must learn how to calm down. The more I look at religion and the peple who buy into it, the more scared I become.
1 June 2010
God likes Black Holes.
I had never heard of Richard Carrier before but I'm pleased I came across him.
23 May 2010
Is the bible literally true? Two kinds of people ask this question;
those who believe that it really is and they then go on to quote from it
and those who are about to rip it to pieces.
This is my comment to the blog piece here;
Want to guess which category I am from?
those who believe that it really is and they then go on to quote from it
and those who are about to rip it to pieces.
This is my comment to the blog piece here;
The bible is full of contradictions and reads like an essay in Geneology. How can it be the word of god? It contains what god is supposed to have said to people who he appeared to when no-one else was there. Couldn't he have written it himself? Was he dyslexic? There weren't any tape recorders at the time but he could have improvised.
There have been no further releases in the last many hundred years. Has it ever occured to you that the bible is at best a collection of writings by desert dwellest trying to explain how they got here and how to look after their own and at worst, a tool to manipulate and control?
Want to guess which category I am from?
19 May 2010
My picture of Mohammed.
This is my picture of Mohammed. He is sitting on a nice porcelain toilet, the likes of which are mentioned in the Koran over a thousand years before they were discovered. You would think someone would have taken out a patent before Mr Crapper.
Notice the psychedelic art that has been added to the picture. It is well documented that Mohammed was a pot-head who invented the electric guitar when inserting wires thin enough to break in his 'wife' Aisha. Her writhing caused harmonic distortion that Mohammed was able to utilise through a Marshall stack and a humbucker pickup. The rosewood neck followed later when Aisha was able to be more accommodating.
He went on to tour extensively throughout the Middle East, developing an extreme reputation as a hedonistic pleasure seeker, taking on many male and female lovers. He was also rumoured to experiment with satanic worship before turning his back on sex drugs and paedophilia and opening up an antique shop in Eastbourne where he became friends with Ronnie Barker.
15 May 2010
Jesus torture porn.
My signature on Sheffield Forum used to be-
The world is slowly waking to the absolute nonsense of wizards, deities, magic, child bearing virgins and twisted death fetishists.
I came across a new expression recently, 'Torture Porn'. The reference in the film 'The Passion of Christ' is discussed here.
We tell children how christ was beaten, flogged and nailed to a cross to forgive them for their sins. How fucking sick is that? They see pictures of an alomst naked man, pierced by nails and dying and people think that's ok? If I showed my kids pictures of men in loin cloths having parts of their bodies involuntarily peirced by objects, I would probably have social services knocking on the door and rightly so.
This twisted death fetishism messes up kids' heads and should be banned.
The world is slowly waking to the absolute nonsense of wizards, deities, magic, child bearing virgins and twisted death fetishists.
I came across a new expression recently, 'Torture Porn'. The reference in the film 'The Passion of Christ' is discussed here.
We tell children how christ was beaten, flogged and nailed to a cross to forgive them for their sins. How fucking sick is that? They see pictures of an alomst naked man, pierced by nails and dying and people think that's ok? If I showed my kids pictures of men in loin cloths having parts of their bodies involuntarily peirced by objects, I would probably have social services knocking on the door and rightly so.
This twisted death fetishism messes up kids' heads and should be banned.
The arrogance of christians
How can anyone believe in the literal interpretation Adam and Eve unless they are prepared to throw science and reason out of the window? It's mad enough that people think they have a relationship with god, the creator. Come on do you really think that the guy that made all this would want to talk to you or consider your pathetic prayers? Such arrogance.
This is my comment to the evangeilcal post on this blog. Where does this personal relationship with god come from? Adults are not supposed to have imaginary friends. How do they imagine it works? Is god able to communicate with every person on the planet simaeltaneously? Does he put his voice in peoples' heads or does he give them a 'sense' of what he wants them to do without actually speaking? Does a YouTube video pop up on their computer with a personal message from the saviour? Does he Twitter?
Does the one true god actually know about these new and innovative ways of reaching people? This is serious shit. People are going to die and go to hell because they never knew Jesus. If you have faith, it is your duty to preach and convert as many souls as possible to the way of the lord.
God will continue to do his bit by ................ erm ............. Well he must be doing something. Rapture? How much preparation does that need? Fixing the fault lines? Designing out congenital abnormalities? Setting up life on Alpha Centauri? Healing the odd person at Lourdes, getting his legal team together to defend Benny?
This is my comment to the evangeilcal post on this blog. Where does this personal relationship with god come from? Adults are not supposed to have imaginary friends. How do they imagine it works? Is god able to communicate with every person on the planet simaeltaneously? Does he put his voice in peoples' heads or does he give them a 'sense' of what he wants them to do without actually speaking? Does a YouTube video pop up on their computer with a personal message from the saviour? Does he Twitter?
Does the one true god actually know about these new and innovative ways of reaching people? This is serious shit. People are going to die and go to hell because they never knew Jesus. If you have faith, it is your duty to preach and convert as many souls as possible to the way of the lord.
God will continue to do his bit by ................ erm ............. Well he must be doing something. Rapture? How much preparation does that need? Fixing the fault lines? Designing out congenital abnormalities? Setting up life on Alpha Centauri? Healing the odd person at Lourdes, getting his legal team together to defend Benny?
11 May 2010
Government
We have a new PM. He went to a place called Eton where he learned how to be a fag. I doubt he has any idea what the majority of people have to deal with in their daily lives.
The secular Lib Dem MP, Dr Evan Harris lost his seat much to the pleasure of some media idiots. The person who holds the 'potential' is Nick Clegg the Lib Dem leader who is MP for Sheffield Hallam. Not far from me and the most affluent place in the UK.
Why is there so much infusion between church and state? Why do so few MPs state their lack of belief? Politics has become so cheap. I doubt most MPs could hold a principle for longer than a minute if it didn't conform with the Party view.
I think we are heading for a global meltdown. Too many people on a too small planet. Too much being consumed and nothing left to replace it. If politics doesn't get radical soon and if punters don't realise we are in for a hard slog, future generations are going to be cursing us to their graves.
The secular Lib Dem MP, Dr Evan Harris lost his seat much to the pleasure of some media idiots. The person who holds the 'potential' is Nick Clegg the Lib Dem leader who is MP for Sheffield Hallam. Not far from me and the most affluent place in the UK.
Why is there so much infusion between church and state? Why do so few MPs state their lack of belief? Politics has become so cheap. I doubt most MPs could hold a principle for longer than a minute if it didn't conform with the Party view.
I think we are heading for a global meltdown. Too many people on a too small planet. Too much being consumed and nothing left to replace it. If politics doesn't get radical soon and if punters don't realise we are in for a hard slog, future generations are going to be cursing us to their graves.
9 May 2010
Pain
I haven't been here for a while and I am amazed to find I have four followers. I used to look every day in the hope that I had at least one and no-one ever materialised.
I am going to try really hard from now on to post something regularly. It's interesting how I think I have all the answers (in a broad sense) when it comes to gods and religion but can I sort out my own life? No chance!
It must be so tempting for people to turn to a higher power because it is absolute shite knowing that I only have myself to hold to account for the situation that I am in. I can't blame god or look on it as a test of faith. I need to do something. No prayeres or divine inspiration or advice from a man of the cloth.
I recall a song by Slade many years ago. It never made it onto an album. It was a 'B side' called, "I'm me, I'm now and that's all". That pretty much sums it up. I'm not looking anywhere else for inspiration and I know I am causing others pain. I'm sat on the other side of a wall from the person who I thought would be my best friend and lover until one of us died. Now I know it cannot be. I have to find somewhere between self-preservation and doing what I think I 'should'. Talking of songs, I recall the line in "The Boys of Summer" that said, "You can never look back, you must never look back". It's hard though to draw a line and move on knowing the pain I have caused.
I am going to try really hard from now on to post something regularly. It's interesting how I think I have all the answers (in a broad sense) when it comes to gods and religion but can I sort out my own life? No chance!
It must be so tempting for people to turn to a higher power because it is absolute shite knowing that I only have myself to hold to account for the situation that I am in. I can't blame god or look on it as a test of faith. I need to do something. No prayeres or divine inspiration or advice from a man of the cloth.
I recall a song by Slade many years ago. It never made it onto an album. It was a 'B side' called, "I'm me, I'm now and that's all". That pretty much sums it up. I'm not looking anywhere else for inspiration and I know I am causing others pain. I'm sat on the other side of a wall from the person who I thought would be my best friend and lover until one of us died. Now I know it cannot be. I have to find somewhere between self-preservation and doing what I think I 'should'. Talking of songs, I recall the line in "The Boys of Summer" that said, "You can never look back, you must never look back". It's hard though to draw a line and move on knowing the pain I have caused.
3 April 2010
26 March 2010
A letter from the Poap
It is with great concern that I write to to you as God's only true representative on Earth. It seems that some of your Irish bishops have been very naughty - very naughty indeed.
Some bishops in your country of Ireland have shown an inadequate response to the problem of a tiny proportion of priests (no more than 5% - tops) having sex with your children. Before you get all too concerned, let's not forget that other people abuse children too. Indeed there are more abusers outside the church than inside, so let's keep things in proportion, OK?
Coincidentally, a few bishops in other far flung places in the globe have behaved exactly the same - I can't think why. Thank God I handled things so much better when I was an archbishop. But don't dwell on this, just remember how brilliant the Irish church is. I'll pray for you to get over the mess you've made of everything. Remember too how your forefathers stood up to protestants and remained stubbornly loyal to the Holy See. What a bunch of selfish traitors you'd be to give up on that loyalty to me now. You've all been getting a bit too secular nowadays and haven't been paying enough attention to what I tell you to do. Now look where it's got you.
None of this would've happened if people followed orders. Unfortunately, a few rogue Irish bishops, doubtless through a misplaced loyalty to the reputation of the Church, haven't notified the proper ecclesiastical authorities and so haven't done the cover up properly. I've done everything I could to clean up after the Irish bishops' total bumbling incompetence on this, stonewalling every request for cooperation from the police. I told the Irish bishops to find out the truth, then bury it as quickly as possible but they even messed that up.
I really am most terribly sorry that some of you were raped by Irish homosexual priests. For some reason, in a society where being gay was an imprisonable offence, we seemed to attract a lot of them. I've known about the whole thing for decades, but now that everyone else knows about it, I really am very sorry. It must be awful for you, especially when you spoke out and were threatened and leaned on to shutup just like in every other diocese in the world. (Anyone would think someone had sent secret instructions to all the bishops telling them to hush the whole thing up.) But please don't worry, we've started an even more intense persecution of homosexuals. Yeah! And if you come back to us in a spirit of penitence and humility, we'll welcome you back to the Church and will happily hear your confessions and forgive all your sins again.
To the priests who caused all this trouble for me, you've been very, very, very bad indeed. Very bad. Don't do it again or you'll have to be moved to yet another parish.
To parents, I can only say that it is every child's right to be brought up a Catholic. It's a great shame that in so doing some of them have been scarred for life, some have even killed themselves (which I need to remind you is a mortal sin and so they won't go to Heaven), but on the plus side they still got to hear about how great we are.
To children - stay Catholic. It's really important that you keep contributing funds, kneeling in front of us and kissing our rings. It makes us feel really important you know.
To Irish bishops - for god's sake get your act together. This is a PR disaster.
To all the faithful of Ireland, I hope these words of encouragement and support make you feel much better. You face a difficult task after the mess that you and secularists have made of things. But don't worry, the priests of Ireland are right behind you and they're willing to go all the way with you.
And now to specific steps that I'm going to take to address all of this. First I think you should pray a lot. Pray really, really hard. Next, come to Confession more, and come back to the Adoration of the Eucharist a bit more too - congregations are getting a bit too patchy and takings are down. I'd also like the Bishops to go on retreat, do a bit more praying, a bit more apologising and figure out how you're going to handle this a bit better next time round.
And now, a prayer for Ireland. Dear Jesus - keep everybody Catholic. Amen.
There - now that everything's fixed, I've said I'm sorry, can we please move on.
"Platitude of the Day" See it here.
Some bishops in your country of Ireland have shown an inadequate response to the problem of a tiny proportion of priests (no more than 5% - tops) having sex with your children. Before you get all too concerned, let's not forget that other people abuse children too. Indeed there are more abusers outside the church than inside, so let's keep things in proportion, OK?
Coincidentally, a few bishops in other far flung places in the globe have behaved exactly the same - I can't think why. Thank God I handled things so much better when I was an archbishop. But don't dwell on this, just remember how brilliant the Irish church is. I'll pray for you to get over the mess you've made of everything. Remember too how your forefathers stood up to protestants and remained stubbornly loyal to the Holy See. What a bunch of selfish traitors you'd be to give up on that loyalty to me now. You've all been getting a bit too secular nowadays and haven't been paying enough attention to what I tell you to do. Now look where it's got you.
None of this would've happened if people followed orders. Unfortunately, a few rogue Irish bishops, doubtless through a misplaced loyalty to the reputation of the Church, haven't notified the proper ecclesiastical authorities and so haven't done the cover up properly. I've done everything I could to clean up after the Irish bishops' total bumbling incompetence on this, stonewalling every request for cooperation from the police. I told the Irish bishops to find out the truth, then bury it as quickly as possible but they even messed that up.
I really am most terribly sorry that some of you were raped by Irish homosexual priests. For some reason, in a society where being gay was an imprisonable offence, we seemed to attract a lot of them. I've known about the whole thing for decades, but now that everyone else knows about it, I really am very sorry. It must be awful for you, especially when you spoke out and were threatened and leaned on to shutup just like in every other diocese in the world. (Anyone would think someone had sent secret instructions to all the bishops telling them to hush the whole thing up.) But please don't worry, we've started an even more intense persecution of homosexuals. Yeah! And if you come back to us in a spirit of penitence and humility, we'll welcome you back to the Church and will happily hear your confessions and forgive all your sins again.
To the priests who caused all this trouble for me, you've been very, very, very bad indeed. Very bad. Don't do it again or you'll have to be moved to yet another parish.
To parents, I can only say that it is every child's right to be brought up a Catholic. It's a great shame that in so doing some of them have been scarred for life, some have even killed themselves (which I need to remind you is a mortal sin and so they won't go to Heaven), but on the plus side they still got to hear about how great we are.
To children - stay Catholic. It's really important that you keep contributing funds, kneeling in front of us and kissing our rings. It makes us feel really important you know.
To Irish bishops - for god's sake get your act together. This is a PR disaster.
To all the faithful of Ireland, I hope these words of encouragement and support make you feel much better. You face a difficult task after the mess that you and secularists have made of things. But don't worry, the priests of Ireland are right behind you and they're willing to go all the way with you.
And now to specific steps that I'm going to take to address all of this. First I think you should pray a lot. Pray really, really hard. Next, come to Confession more, and come back to the Adoration of the Eucharist a bit more too - congregations are getting a bit too patchy and takings are down. I'd also like the Bishops to go on retreat, do a bit more praying, a bit more apologising and figure out how you're going to handle this a bit better next time round.
And now, a prayer for Ireland. Dear Jesus - keep everybody Catholic. Amen.
There - now that everything's fixed, I've said I'm sorry, can we please move on.
"Platitude of the Day" See it here.
25 March 2010
Child forced to sing about a god on a donkey
Dear
I was discussing religious assembly with my son last week when he mentioned that he sang along but made up his own words because his lack of any belief in a god meant he felt uncomfortable singing songs of praise. I suggested that he just chose not to sing.
It would seem that he took me up on this and exercised what I thought would be his right not to join in an act of worship. He informs me that Miss ******* then told him to sing or she would make him sing solo in front of the entire assembly.
I think it is important for children to come together for assembly, despite the constraints placed on it by the requirement to provide a daily act of Christian worship and I would not wish ***** to be withdrawn from such an act. It doesn’t hurt to stand through a hymn or two or to sit through a prayer but I don’t feel that it is right for my son to be forced to take part in an act of worship under threat of humiliation.
I would expect the same concessions for ***** as are given to children of different faiths, who I doubt would be ‘encouraged’ to join in in such a direct way.
I have no wish to make an issue out of this. It was ***** who asked that I follow it up on his behalf and I am sure he would welcome the opportunity to discuss it further.
Yours etc.
I was discussing religious assembly with my son last week when he mentioned that he sang along but made up his own words because his lack of any belief in a god meant he felt uncomfortable singing songs of praise. I suggested that he just chose not to sing.
It would seem that he took me up on this and exercised what I thought would be his right not to join in an act of worship. He informs me that Miss ******* then told him to sing or she would make him sing solo in front of the entire assembly.
I think it is important for children to come together for assembly, despite the constraints placed on it by the requirement to provide a daily act of Christian worship and I would not wish ***** to be withdrawn from such an act. It doesn’t hurt to stand through a hymn or two or to sit through a prayer but I don’t feel that it is right for my son to be forced to take part in an act of worship under threat of humiliation.
I would expect the same concessions for ***** as are given to children of different faiths, who I doubt would be ‘encouraged’ to join in in such a direct way.
I have no wish to make an issue out of this. It was ***** who asked that I follow it up on his behalf and I am sure he would welcome the opportunity to discuss it further.
Yours etc.
19 February 2010
What the Poap would say on 'Thought for the Day'.
I don't have permission to copy this but hey, no-one reads this blog anyway.
“Good Morning, John. Good morning, Sarah. And good morning, Rabbi Lionel Blue. It’s a great pleasure to be here to offer you my Thought for the Day. Who indeed would have ‘Thought’ it, eh? That’s my little joke, written and approved for me by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. What we call things is important isn’t it? So I’m not sure Thought for the Day is quite right: Sounds dangerously pluralist to me. They’ll be suggesting a secular Thought for the Day next. Or, worse, an Anglican one. I’ve toyed with Encyclical of the Day, but that seems a bit long. Perhaps Bull of the Day? But the producers here at the BBC tell me that it’s been called that for some time anyway. I’m told I have only three minutes, though I hope it’ll feel like an eternity, if you follow me. And you should, before it’s too late. People ask why I’ve come to Britain. Simple, I reply. I was invited. Rather in the same way as I was invited by English Anglo-Catholics to offer them a home in Rome. Of course, in one sense – and there is only One – Britain is under my authority, so I do see that I have invited myself. And that’s the point, really, and the Thought I want to leave you with today, here on Today: This is not a State visit. I specifically asked for it not to be. The Queen can’t invite me to visit, because she is so-called Supreme Head of a Church whose orders are invalid. So, rather, I have invited the Queen to visit me. In England. It’s a question not only of being holy and apostolic, you see, but universal. So it’s not a question of your people coming to Rome. Rome is coming to you. We know where you live. And don’t think I just live in the Vatican – what do you think I am, Patriarch of the West? No, I’m Patriarch of the whole darned shooting match, thankyou very much, as I tried to explain to the Archbishop of Canterbury when I told him to come to Rome last year. It’s a question of authority, you see. Not Her Majesty’s, not her Church of England’s, not the British state’s – or for that matter the British state broadcaster’s. I gather there used to be a Broadcasting Standards Authority, but that’s gone now. As I’m told has the authority of the BBC. That’s what the nice young Jesuit, Mark Thompson, said when he invited me here. He has no authority either. It’s all mine. And best for us all that you recognise that. Pax vobiscum.”
“Good Morning, John. Good morning, Sarah. And good morning, Rabbi Lionel Blue. It’s a great pleasure to be here to offer you my Thought for the Day. Who indeed would have ‘Thought’ it, eh? That’s my little joke, written and approved for me by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. What we call things is important isn’t it? So I’m not sure Thought for the Day is quite right: Sounds dangerously pluralist to me. They’ll be suggesting a secular Thought for the Day next. Or, worse, an Anglican one. I’ve toyed with Encyclical of the Day, but that seems a bit long. Perhaps Bull of the Day? But the producers here at the BBC tell me that it’s been called that for some time anyway. I’m told I have only three minutes, though I hope it’ll feel like an eternity, if you follow me. And you should, before it’s too late. People ask why I’ve come to Britain. Simple, I reply. I was invited. Rather in the same way as I was invited by English Anglo-Catholics to offer them a home in Rome. Of course, in one sense – and there is only One – Britain is under my authority, so I do see that I have invited myself. And that’s the point, really, and the Thought I want to leave you with today, here on Today: This is not a State visit. I specifically asked for it not to be. The Queen can’t invite me to visit, because she is so-called Supreme Head of a Church whose orders are invalid. So, rather, I have invited the Queen to visit me. In England. It’s a question not only of being holy and apostolic, you see, but universal. So it’s not a question of your people coming to Rome. Rome is coming to you. We know where you live. And don’t think I just live in the Vatican – what do you think I am, Patriarch of the West? No, I’m Patriarch of the whole darned shooting match, thankyou very much, as I tried to explain to the Archbishop of Canterbury when I told him to come to Rome last year. It’s a question of authority, you see. Not Her Majesty’s, not her Church of England’s, not the British state’s – or for that matter the British state broadcaster’s. I gather there used to be a Broadcasting Standards Authority, but that’s gone now. As I’m told has the authority of the BBC. That’s what the nice young Jesuit, Mark Thompson, said when he invited me here. He has no authority either. It’s all mine. And best for us all that you recognise that. Pax vobiscum.”
18 February 2010
People need Faith at any cost
I had some Jehovas Witnesses call round a few days ago. There is a mission a couple of streets away. The conversation ended a draw but I think I had more of the ball. It was interesting to argue religion in real time for a change.
The bottom line finally arrived at was that they needed to believe in some higher power because without that, their life would have no meaning or purpose. So they choose to hang on to a belief because their reality could not exist without it. A friend of my wife said something similar, that even if god had been personally responsibile for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, she would still believe in him because she could not imagine having to face life on her own.
Let's face it, as a species, we have become self-aware but we still need that existential element to help define how we got here and to take culpability and fear of death away from us.
I have just stumbled across this amazing site by following Banana Man's blog ring and I would like to share it with you both; http://nothingexistsdespiteappearances.blogspot.com/?expref=next-blog
Not sure what to make of it but it needs further exploration.
I am content to know that there is no meaning to anything other than what we allocate to it. I'm me, I'm now and that's all. No god. No purpose. No sense. No one Truth.
No redemption. I am responsible to the people around me. I will have lived and died in less than a blink of an eye in this cosmos but I will live on through my childen.
Every second of my life is precious because it is all I have.
The bottom line finally arrived at was that they needed to believe in some higher power because without that, their life would have no meaning or purpose. So they choose to hang on to a belief because their reality could not exist without it. A friend of my wife said something similar, that even if god had been personally responsibile for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, she would still believe in him because she could not imagine having to face life on her own.
Let's face it, as a species, we have become self-aware but we still need that existential element to help define how we got here and to take culpability and fear of death away from us.
I have just stumbled across this amazing site by following Banana Man's blog ring and I would like to share it with you both; http://nothingexistsdespiteappearances.blogspot.com/?expref=next-blog
Not sure what to make of it but it needs further exploration.
I am content to know that there is no meaning to anything other than what we allocate to it. I'm me, I'm now and that's all. No god. No purpose. No sense. No one Truth.
No redemption. I am responsible to the people around me. I will have lived and died in less than a blink of an eye in this cosmos but I will live on through my childen.
Every second of my life is precious because it is all I have.
15 February 2010
The danger of Islam over other religions
I may be misinformed here but my take on Islam is that it is the 'One true religion' and its followers have a duty to convert kaffirs or declare jihad on them (whatever the interpretation of that is). It is that black and white. As for apostates, I know of no other religion where some factions advocate death.
Faith schools and religious segregation are allowed and encouraged by this government and Madrasses are being set up all over the place. I have learned about fundie christian groups, particularly in America but this fundementalist blind faith of Islam is being enforced in every town and city in this country. If you teach people not to question or to apply logic and reason, you are making succeptable to being brainwashed further down the road by whoever gets hold of them.
The UN has passed a resolution against religious defamation and look what Ireland has put in place. Religious indoctrination is attracting protection and validation like never before when there should be some kind of redress of the balance, or at least a core curriculum covering all religion and none. I feel so sorry for the poor children who are force fed dogma until they are unable to think for themselves.
.
Faith schools and religious segregation are allowed and encouraged by this government and Madrasses are being set up all over the place. I have learned about fundie christian groups, particularly in America but this fundementalist blind faith of Islam is being enforced in every town and city in this country. If you teach people not to question or to apply logic and reason, you are making succeptable to being brainwashed further down the road by whoever gets hold of them.
The UN has passed a resolution against religious defamation and look what Ireland has put in place. Religious indoctrination is attracting protection and validation like never before when there should be some kind of redress of the balance, or at least a core curriculum covering all religion and none. I feel so sorry for the poor children who are force fed dogma until they are unable to think for themselves.
.
10 February 2010
God's Job Description
I wonder what God's job description would look like. It would have to make reference to 'moving in mysterious ways.' Is He is on a 'fixed term contract' and what would happen to us if he retired?
I wonder what does He do with His leisure time. He could visit Earth as a mystery shopper, but does being omnipotent takes some of the fun away? Perhaps he is busy creating other universes, hence the lack of plague, pestilance, smiting etc over the last couple of millennia. However he could have sub-contracted the operation to someone in his absence.
I really do feel that God has been neglecting things of late, which may not be a bad thing as He was responsible for the slaughter of a good few million people. I also think He enjoys the controversy He causes. Otherwise He would have done something to silence the doubters and worshipers of false idols.
He made us in His image but do we have the same emotional capacity as God? If so, he must get upset when all the nice fluffy animals get drowned in floods and he must get angry with all the nasty terrorists. He sent two bears to kill some children just for insulting a bald man. His job script really should spell out the need for consistency, particularly regarding equality of opportunity. God doesn't seem to be on record as promoting the rights of Gays or Women.
He built a world that is 3/4 sea and then designed us to live on land, much of which looks pretty but is uninhabitable. He then let the world become over populated, banned birth control and didn't supply enough raw materials, particularly crude oil (Of course He may well know that we are going to invent the 'anti gravity drive in 2030, so it won't be an issue).
Could it be that God told us he is omnipotent but still has some way to go? I feel that my faith is being tested and I am sorry but I want some proof that He is still up to the job or at least meets the minimum person specification. What if He has given up on the job and not told anyone? Who is He accountable to?
I wonder what does He do with His leisure time. He could visit Earth as a mystery shopper, but does being omnipotent takes some of the fun away? Perhaps he is busy creating other universes, hence the lack of plague, pestilance, smiting etc over the last couple of millennia. However he could have sub-contracted the operation to someone in his absence.
I really do feel that God has been neglecting things of late, which may not be a bad thing as He was responsible for the slaughter of a good few million people. I also think He enjoys the controversy He causes. Otherwise He would have done something to silence the doubters and worshipers of false idols.
He made us in His image but do we have the same emotional capacity as God? If so, he must get upset when all the nice fluffy animals get drowned in floods and he must get angry with all the nasty terrorists. He sent two bears to kill some children just for insulting a bald man. His job script really should spell out the need for consistency, particularly regarding equality of opportunity. God doesn't seem to be on record as promoting the rights of Gays or Women.
He built a world that is 3/4 sea and then designed us to live on land, much of which looks pretty but is uninhabitable. He then let the world become over populated, banned birth control and didn't supply enough raw materials, particularly crude oil (Of course He may well know that we are going to invent the 'anti gravity drive in 2030, so it won't be an issue).
Could it be that God told us he is omnipotent but still has some way to go? I feel that my faith is being tested and I am sorry but I want some proof that He is still up to the job or at least meets the minimum person specification. What if He has given up on the job and not told anyone? Who is He accountable to?
4 February 2010
The philosophy behind manscaping (landscaping of a man's hair) is if you get a haircut for the top of your head, you should consider caring for the rest of your hairy body. If your wife says she doesn't care or notice, she is lying! Never manscape in public (like the gym locker room) and don't think people don't notice your curly, pubic-like, shoulder hair when you wear a tank top. Lastly, the motivation for manscaping is for a woman, not to become one.
Trim your hairy chest, arms and legs. Shaving them is metrosexual, trimming is manscaping
Wax your back, it's gross
Keep armpit hair in your armpit
No one should ever see hair coming out of your nose or ears
If you're going bald, shave it. You're not fooling anyone and Agassi's hair was a wig
Never give yourself a haircut and if no one has ever complimented you after your wife's attempt she must stop too
Shave your neck line between haircut appointments
Uni-brows are still out so pluck and shape but don't over do it Alice.
Eyebrows should have a length limit. How come you don't notice that 2 inch wild hair?
Cut your sideburns parallel to your jaw bone and cut facial hair symmetrically
Don't miss a patch of hair while shaving. We notice the left over stubble under your nose and around your moles
Trimming some areas make objects appear larger than they are!
Knuckle hair shouldn't cover your wedding ring.
Trim your hairy chest, arms and legs. Shaving them is metrosexual, trimming is manscaping
Wax your back, it's gross
Keep armpit hair in your armpit
No one should ever see hair coming out of your nose or ears
If you're going bald, shave it. You're not fooling anyone and Agassi's hair was a wig
Never give yourself a haircut and if no one has ever complimented you after your wife's attempt she must stop too
Shave your neck line between haircut appointments
Uni-brows are still out so pluck and shape but don't over do it Alice.
Eyebrows should have a length limit. How come you don't notice that 2 inch wild hair?
Cut your sideburns parallel to your jaw bone and cut facial hair symmetrically
Don't miss a patch of hair while shaving. We notice the left over stubble under your nose and around your moles
Trimming some areas make objects appear larger than they are!
Knuckle hair shouldn't cover your wedding ring.
28 January 2010
5 January 2010
Second-Hand Revelation
My comment on this blog
And a reply from Bob A, who said...
I am beginning to find that there is no debating with people like Bob A, no inch that they are prepared to give, no admission that their beliefs could appear to be absurd and then they pull answers out of the bible to show me they are right.
I'm just as bad because I know I am right. There can be no concept of me being wrong either unless god is a sadist. And then which god? Now that's given me an idea, "Which God? - We test all the major religions and come up with a best buy and recommended".
One could say that virtually every verse in the Bible, Qu’ran, or other holy text from a revealed religion could be preceded by "Some guy said God told him to tell you..." Millions have taken it for granted that an omnipotent God chose second-hand revelation as a primary method to communicate to us.JANUARY 2, 2010 4:03 PM
One seeming paradox of second-hand revelation is that God supposedly had a message for all of humanity, but God told just a few guys. For unexplained reasons, God apparently stopped communicating that way from then on, putting the burden on them to be messenger boys. Well, perhaps God didn’t stop entirely, as we continue to get claims of revelation periodically, but many revelations claim to be the final one and pronounce dire warnings to any who claim later ones. That might explain the tendency for many to accept ancient revelation over modern revelation.
If God uses a few selected scribes to reveal all-important truths to the rest of us, we are essentially stuck taking their word for it. To me, it seems ironic and contradictory that God allegedly would want a personal relationship but then use bronze-age tribesmen as agents to obtain it.
Why would an omnipotent being choose this method in the first place, with all the risks of translation error, copy error, miscommunication, cross-cultural differences, appearance of favoritism, inherent limits of human language, and so on? It can’t be more trouble to simply speak to us directly, if omnipotence is a reality.
Why are conflicting revelations allowed?
Some claim that the path to eternal salvation lies in second-hand revelation. If so, wouldn't that place your salvation into the hands a fallible human? It seems odd that this arguably most important of truths would be communicated indirectly by fallible humans, especially when God is said to be omnipotent.
Would the originating force behind the entire universe choose a method so fraught with potential for trouble? As if God needed a spokesguy... In the churches of my youth, we simply took it for granted and never gave it a second thought. Is that common?
And a reply from Bob A, who said...
Philip, I believe your thoughts cross many minds that really want to seek the truth. I remember I wrestled with the same questions when I was first introduced to the Bible. But the more I read, the more I saw within His word that it was the simple things that God chose to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:26-28 26Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are,….).JANUARY 4, 2010 4:23 PM
Unless this book is a series of our-right lies (it has withstood the test and punishment of man and time without a scratch), we need to take it for what it says it is…the truth (Jer.34:12; 2Tim 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-21; Rev. 1:1; 14:13..and my favorite 1 John 5:13) …..this is of course where faith comes in….but not blind faith…..faith that believes on evidence and reason.
There are so many scholars that spend their lives searching and defending the Bible through apologetics. I have found a great source to be Josh McDowel’s “The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict”. Also check out Dr. James White on his website, http://aomin.org/ he's great.
I guess for me the testimony of the inspired men of God that became martyrs for their beliefs gave me the historical evidence I needed combined with reason, logic, the laws of evidence and faith…Paul seems to have summed it up for me.....
Galatians 1:6-24 No Other Gospel
“ 6I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!
10Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Paul Called by God
11I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.
I would say it is common for the world to look at God’s word this way…….I would say it is unfortunately, but what is common to man is not common to God.. 1 Corinthians 10:13
“No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful……”.
1 Corinthians 2:15-16 15The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment: 16"For who has known the mind of the Lord
that he may instruct him?"[a] But we have the mind of Christ.
Aren’t you glad He chose us to be able to look at the things of God His Way?!
I am beginning to find that there is no debating with people like Bob A, no inch that they are prepared to give, no admission that their beliefs could appear to be absurd and then they pull answers out of the bible to show me they are right.
I'm just as bad because I know I am right. There can be no concept of me being wrong either unless god is a sadist. And then which god? Now that's given me an idea, "Which God? - We test all the major religions and come up with a best buy and recommended".
3 January 2010
He's from Denmark
"Islam is the one and true religion. The Quran says so - and then it gotta be true. So i REVERTED to islam. Because all people are BORN into islam. That is a biological fact. So when you "convert" to islam you actually revert - because you are only returning to the one and true religion. That is a fact"
http://www.youtube.com/user/reverttoislam
It's going to be a long hard ride fellow anti-theists. Give the man an axe. He's from Denmark you know.
Right and Wrong is human made
I like the point he makes about the concept being invented by humans and then attributed to their gods. He states that there is no one or nothing to miss us if we all perished tomorrow and it's perhaps that thought that drives believers deeper into their faith as this reality is just too much for them.
Have they actually considered what Heaven will be like when they get there? No board games by the sound of it. And no one ever comes back to tell us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)