SUMERIA AND OTHER ANCIENT CULTURES
Previously: “Studying the ancient stories of Sumer, some history buffs believe some Nephilim (also called the Annunaki) came cruising by from the planet Nibiru and created humans as slaves.”
Apparently the idea of a paradise, a heaven and hell, of a god and angels, a tree of immortality and even a great flood came originally from Sumeria. In fact some call the Sumerians the first human civilization, and already it was filled with these fantastic stories. They show the first evidence of a system of writing (or we wouldn’t know so much about them), had the first standing army in history, and had cities with walls around them. it appears as though they just burst full-blown onto the scene. But of course we must always keep in mind that Archaeology is barely getting started, and we’ve only dug up about 5% of the earth’s land surface – there could be father-civilizations out there still.
I once assisted with the making of a short film set in medieval times. It started out with a nursemaid telling a story to children in a castle. We decided that the children should be of every race we could get hold of. Only later did it occur to me that we were actually altering history. Children of every race did not live in European castles in the Middle Ages. It felt so right to do it that way, but it wasn’t the truth. Given the choice, I wouldn’t do it that way again, but it goes to show, I think, how astonishingly easy it is to make the story just a little more fair or pleasant or clear or just. Not only were there children of all races, they were all dressed as only princes and princesses would have been dressed at the time. I call this the 25% embellishment allowance. If you seriously consider this story-telling flaw, then extrapolate over a few centuries - think how many generations came and went before our ancient stories were written down, it’s frightening. What have we been believing? This is why so many seekers are searching for the most ancient of religions – we want to know what mankind thought before the deterioration of centuries. Sumer gives us that.
But it would be too bad if someone mistook “2001: A Space Odyssey” as a true history or as a religious teaching of our century. How can we tell Sumerian’s entertainment literature from actual beliefs? We can’t.
The fact that Sumerians “invented” writing is also to their blame – for what is oral changes with the times, but what is written can last for centuries without change. I guess that’s both a good thing AND a bad thing.
When archaeologists uncovered evidence of a kind of combination soccer/basketball court in South America, what made them decide it was a religious pastime? We’re never told. The ball going through the hoop describes the same arc as the sun in the sky? Oh, please! Can’t they have enjoyed sports? Sure, there are some murals that depict one team killing the other, but don’t we basically say the same? We’re going to murder the other team? And the Aztec bent for executions (sometimes several thousand in a single DAY) is believed to be a way of sending prayers to the gods. I haven’t seen the evidence of that (and I don’t believe we’ve deciphered their writing as yet). Is it just an archaeologists’ imagining? Of all the sciences out there, archaeological anthropology is probably the one we’d be most likely to understand, but we’re not shown the evidence, just fed the party line.
In the study of history, listen! The most difficult lesson to learn is that people of the past were NOT stupid! They were just like us. I’ve heard people laughing about some of Walt Disney’s creations, saying if a future archaeologist found them, they might think we worshipped mice. What part of that is funny? It’s probably what we’re doing now!
WHAT THE HELL? * * * * * * * RATIONALITY VS SCIENCE &RELIGION * * * * * * * CAN ANY USEFUL SENSE BE FOUND, BETWEEN MEMES, BRAMES AND AN INFINITY OF DIMENSIONS AND UNIVERSES ON THE ONE SIDE AND TRANSUBSTANTIATION, SNAKE-HANDLERS AND MESSIAH-ON-A-POTATO-CHIP ON THE OTHER? A RATIONALIST'S POINT OF VIEW...
Friday, October 30, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
SCIENCE II
EVOLUTION VS DESIGN
The reason this subject is even open for discussion is not only because we can’t understand a thing a physicist or professor of math says, but also because humans our very selves are so unlikely. The evolutionists would have it that we, well, EVOLVED here. But if that were the case, wouldn’t we be some of the baddest mothers on the planet? Instead of being so frail we must cover our skin in sunlight, our feet most anywhere, have no natural weapons AT ALL – even our fingernails are worthless as weapons – they break off before they can hurt anyone but ourselves. Our teeth aren’t good weapons, we have no ability to camouflage ourselves, we can’t even outrun a deer, we’re not strong for our size (we should be at least as strong as a chimp, wouldn’t you think? But we’re not…). We can’t be left out in the rain, out in the sun, or out in the cold. If we’re from here, how is it we need vitamin and mineral supplements to survive? A creature living on the savannah, for example, won’t get much vitamin C. Yet doctors and nutritionists insist we must get more than an orange’s worth per day. What?
We are the only primate whose males haven’t a penile bone. Even though primates are shaped a lot like us, they do not have sex face-to-face as we do – nor do most other earth creatures. Earlobes are another mystery – only humans have them. No genetic advantage, they just hang there. They don’t even improve our hearing. One of the serious questions evolutionists have to face are skulls through the ages. The problem is, when you get to homo sapiens sapiens (us), the skulls (which have gradually been getting larger through the millennia) are suddenly smaller, thinner, more frail, and =thwup= have suddenly invented foreheads.
We can’t see in the dark, in the infrared, can’t hear or smell as well as a dog or hear as well as a cat. We’re puny little helpless things for several years after birth – a fact that didn’t improve our chances of survival in caveman days, unlike a cow or a camel, ready to run alongside its mother within an hour. In fact, it’s hard to think of any human survival advantage. You may name speech, and say we can therefore hand down knowledge and work together in teams – but what about before language developed among us? The ability to speak doesn’t impress a lion in the least (or any cat, for that matter).
We have no defensive weapons – nor do we have any defensive tricks. We can’t spray ink, stink or quills. It’s so easy to knock us down that we don’t even need second-party intervention; we trip over our own feet. And why don’t our females have a breeding “season?” Other animals do, because any young born in winter have a lesser chance of survival – and that was true of early humans, too. It’s not as if this has been going on only since fur coats and central heating.
Only our pluck and our willingness to work together does anything for our survival whatever. I’ve seen a cat chase away a dog ten times it’s weight and twice as vicious; that’s pluck. So it’s a Star Trek world, after all. And what’s this thing we have with art and music? How is that a survival trait? Did it get the chicks? Because if so, both Beethoven and Hendrix missed that boat. Along with Van Goh, Janis Joplin, Leonardo da Vinci, Antonio Vivaldi; it doesn’t seem that being in the entertainment industry makes one prone to more reproductive success. Nor, it seems, does science. Yet we simply burst with artists and scientists of every kind, and always have since the caves. And here’s another point – every other animal on the planet is born capable of making whatever shelter it needs, but mankind took quite a while to figure it out. How can we have evolved in a place where we’re the least likely to survive?
A very long time ago some wise men decided we must have been designed to live in a garden. Studying the ancient stories of Sumer, some history buffs believe some Nephilim (also called the Annunaki) came cruising by from the planet Nibiru and created humans as slaves. I don’t want to even discuss Scientology and its alien forebears. But if I were creating/designing a slave, I’d make him very strong – stronger than local primates, certainly, not to mention local predators! Of these two choices, the garden seems just a bit more likely. There is some evidence (albeit slight) that aliens have been (and/or are now) here. But whether we were created by a god or aliens, it would be unconscionably cruel to create a being for gardens and then toss it out into jungles, savannahs and ice floes, where Neanderthals had already claimed the territory (and yes, they were stronger than we were, and every bit as smart, plus anthropologists now believe they also had the gift of speech). The only reason I can think of which isn’t cruel is that these garden-dwellers got lost or escaped by themselves (and found they had to wear clothing in this new, crueler environment). That might just pass as an original “sin” from which all suffering flows.
I don’t believe there is an omni-present God, nor do I believe in alien intervention (though it’s an interesting possibility), nor do I quite buy evolution. I believe it’s a very difficult subject that has yet to be proven to a satisfactory degree. There have to be more than those three alternatives, don’t there?
The reason this subject is even open for discussion is not only because we can’t understand a thing a physicist or professor of math says, but also because humans our very selves are so unlikely. The evolutionists would have it that we, well, EVOLVED here. But if that were the case, wouldn’t we be some of the baddest mothers on the planet? Instead of being so frail we must cover our skin in sunlight, our feet most anywhere, have no natural weapons AT ALL – even our fingernails are worthless as weapons – they break off before they can hurt anyone but ourselves. Our teeth aren’t good weapons, we have no ability to camouflage ourselves, we can’t even outrun a deer, we’re not strong for our size (we should be at least as strong as a chimp, wouldn’t you think? But we’re not…). We can’t be left out in the rain, out in the sun, or out in the cold. If we’re from here, how is it we need vitamin and mineral supplements to survive? A creature living on the savannah, for example, won’t get much vitamin C. Yet doctors and nutritionists insist we must get more than an orange’s worth per day. What?
We are the only primate whose males haven’t a penile bone. Even though primates are shaped a lot like us, they do not have sex face-to-face as we do – nor do most other earth creatures. Earlobes are another mystery – only humans have them. No genetic advantage, they just hang there. They don’t even improve our hearing. One of the serious questions evolutionists have to face are skulls through the ages. The problem is, when you get to homo sapiens sapiens (us), the skulls (which have gradually been getting larger through the millennia) are suddenly smaller, thinner, more frail, and =thwup= have suddenly invented foreheads.
We can’t see in the dark, in the infrared, can’t hear or smell as well as a dog or hear as well as a cat. We’re puny little helpless things for several years after birth – a fact that didn’t improve our chances of survival in caveman days, unlike a cow or a camel, ready to run alongside its mother within an hour. In fact, it’s hard to think of any human survival advantage. You may name speech, and say we can therefore hand down knowledge and work together in teams – but what about before language developed among us? The ability to speak doesn’t impress a lion in the least (or any cat, for that matter).
We have no defensive weapons – nor do we have any defensive tricks. We can’t spray ink, stink or quills. It’s so easy to knock us down that we don’t even need second-party intervention; we trip over our own feet. And why don’t our females have a breeding “season?” Other animals do, because any young born in winter have a lesser chance of survival – and that was true of early humans, too. It’s not as if this has been going on only since fur coats and central heating.
Only our pluck and our willingness to work together does anything for our survival whatever. I’ve seen a cat chase away a dog ten times it’s weight and twice as vicious; that’s pluck. So it’s a Star Trek world, after all. And what’s this thing we have with art and music? How is that a survival trait? Did it get the chicks? Because if so, both Beethoven and Hendrix missed that boat. Along with Van Goh, Janis Joplin, Leonardo da Vinci, Antonio Vivaldi; it doesn’t seem that being in the entertainment industry makes one prone to more reproductive success. Nor, it seems, does science. Yet we simply burst with artists and scientists of every kind, and always have since the caves. And here’s another point – every other animal on the planet is born capable of making whatever shelter it needs, but mankind took quite a while to figure it out. How can we have evolved in a place where we’re the least likely to survive?
A very long time ago some wise men decided we must have been designed to live in a garden. Studying the ancient stories of Sumer, some history buffs believe some Nephilim (also called the Annunaki) came cruising by from the planet Nibiru and created humans as slaves. I don’t want to even discuss Scientology and its alien forebears. But if I were creating/designing a slave, I’d make him very strong – stronger than local primates, certainly, not to mention local predators! Of these two choices, the garden seems just a bit more likely. There is some evidence (albeit slight) that aliens have been (and/or are now) here. But whether we were created by a god or aliens, it would be unconscionably cruel to create a being for gardens and then toss it out into jungles, savannahs and ice floes, where Neanderthals had already claimed the territory (and yes, they were stronger than we were, and every bit as smart, plus anthropologists now believe they also had the gift of speech). The only reason I can think of which isn’t cruel is that these garden-dwellers got lost or escaped by themselves (and found they had to wear clothing in this new, crueler environment). That might just pass as an original “sin” from which all suffering flows.
I don’t believe there is an omni-present God, nor do I believe in alien intervention (though it’s an interesting possibility), nor do I quite buy evolution. I believe it’s a very difficult subject that has yet to be proven to a satisfactory degree. There have to be more than those three alternatives, don’t there?
Monday, October 26, 2009
SCIENCE
I know I spend a lot more time on religion than I do on science – that’s because I’d need a few decades-worth of college just to understand the questions in science! Whereas religion, alas, gives one all the ammo one could wish. I do believe in the scientific method, and I applaud the brave souls not only trying to figure out what’s what, but staking their reputations and livelihoods all too often on the answers.
Just, lest we rely on scientific reasoning too much, let’s remember that all the laws of physics, biology, all the ologies, really, life, the universe and everything, all apply to only 4% of the universe. Either that, or we have no idea what gravity is (with apologies to Sir Isaac Newton). And the really sad thing is, it’s true – we really know not much more about gravity than Einstein dared imagine. Even though I’m not a bizzillionaire, I’d like to lobby for getting this issue looked into! Let’s also keep in mind that science doesn’t have answers to such questions as “What is reality?” and whether everything we know of is made of vibrating strings, branes, or bits of pure information, or even, as the New-Agers would have it, of thought itself.
And pseudo-science is NOT the answer. Just because real scientists dumb down the message almost enough for people like me to nearly understand it, that doesn’t mean that’s all there is to it. The idea that our “intentions” affect reality is based on some creative thinking. Are you familiar with the question of whether light is a wave or a particle? (Yes, we don’t know what light is, either...) In that experiment, whether or not the experiment was being observed seemed to affect the outcome. Now, if the light doesn’t know whether you’ll be watching or not, it couldn’t do that, and the way I understand it, our INTENTION to observe must therefore be affecting the outcome, because it works even if we tape it and observe it LATER. If that’s not correct, I beg you, explain it to me! But this is very different than saying that anything you can conceive of can be yours (for a progressively larger fee, naturally).
That brings up science’s biggest problem today; how can scientists, who concentrate for an entire career on particles too small for us to see even with the greatest super-microscope, explain to ordinary people what they’re doing and why it matters? If they end with the sentiment that a new technology has been borne out of these experiments, that we get. We LOVE our cell-phones, our tweets and twits and magic boxes of music. Anything that makes more gadgets, we like. But how will we ever know anything if we can’t even figure out gravity? It’s not like it’s a new thing. Or light? Wasn’t that one of the first things ever to exist, in EVERYONE’S creed?
The real question is, if it weren’t for the possibility it could supply us with ever brighter toys, would sciences like quantum physics even be called science? Because science, as I understand it, is supposed to EXPLAIN things, not make them more mysterious. According to Dictionary.com, science is: “Systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.” The operative word being KNOWLEDGE, not imagination or mathematical proof.
Of course we need specialists, and I can certainly see supporting agricultural and pharmaceutical or medical sciences, whether we can understand them or not. But the truth is, in spite of our great technological strides, we don’t know what the basic components of our world are, and some of us care.
Just, lest we rely on scientific reasoning too much, let’s remember that all the laws of physics, biology, all the ologies, really, life, the universe and everything, all apply to only 4% of the universe. Either that, or we have no idea what gravity is (with apologies to Sir Isaac Newton). And the really sad thing is, it’s true – we really know not much more about gravity than Einstein dared imagine. Even though I’m not a bizzillionaire, I’d like to lobby for getting this issue looked into! Let’s also keep in mind that science doesn’t have answers to such questions as “What is reality?” and whether everything we know of is made of vibrating strings, branes, or bits of pure information, or even, as the New-Agers would have it, of thought itself.
And pseudo-science is NOT the answer. Just because real scientists dumb down the message almost enough for people like me to nearly understand it, that doesn’t mean that’s all there is to it. The idea that our “intentions” affect reality is based on some creative thinking. Are you familiar with the question of whether light is a wave or a particle? (Yes, we don’t know what light is, either...) In that experiment, whether or not the experiment was being observed seemed to affect the outcome. Now, if the light doesn’t know whether you’ll be watching or not, it couldn’t do that, and the way I understand it, our INTENTION to observe must therefore be affecting the outcome, because it works even if we tape it and observe it LATER. If that’s not correct, I beg you, explain it to me! But this is very different than saying that anything you can conceive of can be yours (for a progressively larger fee, naturally).
That brings up science’s biggest problem today; how can scientists, who concentrate for an entire career on particles too small for us to see even with the greatest super-microscope, explain to ordinary people what they’re doing and why it matters? If they end with the sentiment that a new technology has been borne out of these experiments, that we get. We LOVE our cell-phones, our tweets and twits and magic boxes of music. Anything that makes more gadgets, we like. But how will we ever know anything if we can’t even figure out gravity? It’s not like it’s a new thing. Or light? Wasn’t that one of the first things ever to exist, in EVERYONE’S creed?
The real question is, if it weren’t for the possibility it could supply us with ever brighter toys, would sciences like quantum physics even be called science? Because science, as I understand it, is supposed to EXPLAIN things, not make them more mysterious. According to Dictionary.com, science is: “Systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.” The operative word being KNOWLEDGE, not imagination or mathematical proof.
Of course we need specialists, and I can certainly see supporting agricultural and pharmaceutical or medical sciences, whether we can understand them or not. But the truth is, in spite of our great technological strides, we don’t know what the basic components of our world are, and some of us care.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
JEWS IN CAPTIVITY
It’s simply incomprehensible to me that people still believe tens of thousands of Jews were slaves in Egypt, even though Egyptian’s (who were masters of record-keeping) kind of forgot to mention that. They also forgot to mention the ten plagues, the escape of the Jews, and the death of the pharaoh’s entire charioteer corps. Archaeologists have been combing the desert for generations and have yet to come across the slightest evidence that a large group camped there for forty years.
Science has tried to provide an explanation; that there was a massive volcanic eruption which would account for all ten of the plagues AND the pillar of smoke by day and fire by night. There would also have been white flakes falling from the sky, but I hope the fleeing Jews didn’t actually eat the volcanic ash and call it mana (perhaps that would fall under the 25% embellishment rate). Science even accounts for the death of the first-born, as the eldest son was usually given night duty over the livestock, who were ill and dying. This doesn’t quite explain the death of pharaoh’s son, as I believe he had people to do that.
But another bizarrely missing piece of the puzzle in the Bible is the name of this pharaoh. Certainly they all knew his name, especially Moses who was supposedly brought up in his household. Yet it’s never once mentioned. It’s a small detail, but telling. Other things that seem strange; that God sends Moses to demand the release of the Jews, but God hardens pharaoh’s heart against Moses. Why would he do that? Another small but extremely annoying detail.
As for the parting of the Red Sea (or the Reed Sea, or the swamp), again Science offers the possibility of a tidal wave, where the water first withdraws (seemingly completely) then rushes back with incredible force. However, there’s never been a tidal wave which would allow forty thousand people and a corps of charioteers to cross the seabed (or swamp) before rushing back and drowning them. Even four hundred people is extremely unlikely. Four people might make it.
Of all of these events, we can say, “Ah, it was miraculous; God at his showiest,” or we can accept the simplest explanation; that the whole episode was caused by nature. Add to that the fact that there weren’t enough Jews in Egypt to even warrant a mention, and apparently the ten plagues weren’t worth mentioning, either, and Pharaoh didn’t have a name, no one camped in that desert, and for all it’s great holiness apparently even the Jews can’t remember which mountain Sinai is, and I think logic must guide us to dismiss this entire story.
For these reasons, I believe in the Holocaust, but I don’t believe in the Exodus. I’m interested in hearing your opinion!
Science has tried to provide an explanation; that there was a massive volcanic eruption which would account for all ten of the plagues AND the pillar of smoke by day and fire by night. There would also have been white flakes falling from the sky, but I hope the fleeing Jews didn’t actually eat the volcanic ash and call it mana (perhaps that would fall under the 25% embellishment rate). Science even accounts for the death of the first-born, as the eldest son was usually given night duty over the livestock, who were ill and dying. This doesn’t quite explain the death of pharaoh’s son, as I believe he had people to do that.
But another bizarrely missing piece of the puzzle in the Bible is the name of this pharaoh. Certainly they all knew his name, especially Moses who was supposedly brought up in his household. Yet it’s never once mentioned. It’s a small detail, but telling. Other things that seem strange; that God sends Moses to demand the release of the Jews, but God hardens pharaoh’s heart against Moses. Why would he do that? Another small but extremely annoying detail.
As for the parting of the Red Sea (or the Reed Sea, or the swamp), again Science offers the possibility of a tidal wave, where the water first withdraws (seemingly completely) then rushes back with incredible force. However, there’s never been a tidal wave which would allow forty thousand people and a corps of charioteers to cross the seabed (or swamp) before rushing back and drowning them. Even four hundred people is extremely unlikely. Four people might make it.
Of all of these events, we can say, “Ah, it was miraculous; God at his showiest,” or we can accept the simplest explanation; that the whole episode was caused by nature. Add to that the fact that there weren’t enough Jews in Egypt to even warrant a mention, and apparently the ten plagues weren’t worth mentioning, either, and Pharaoh didn’t have a name, no one camped in that desert, and for all it’s great holiness apparently even the Jews can’t remember which mountain Sinai is, and I think logic must guide us to dismiss this entire story.
For these reasons, I believe in the Holocaust, but I don’t believe in the Exodus. I’m interested in hearing your opinion!
Thursday, October 22, 2009
DOES GOD KNOW THE FUTURE?
In the book of Job, God makes a bet with Satan that Job will remain faithful to God, even if all the good things in his life are taken away. Now, if God knows the future, wasn’t he cheating? Or did he not know the outcome for certain?
If God knows the future, why didn’t he build a fence around the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? Why didn’t he warn Abel? He warned Noah of the flood and Abraham of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Jews in slavery how to escape the Angel of Death, but these disasters God would have known about in advance because he was the one who supposedly caused them.
But note: “If a thing he said does not come to pass, he is a false prophet.” (Deut 18:22). God said David’s kingdom would last forever, and it didn’t. Jesus said the second coming would happen before his generation passed away, and as far as we know it didn’t. So aren’t both false prophets?
Unlike Abraham, Jephathat did have to sacrifice his child because of a promise he made to God. No angel stopped him, no ram appeared in the brush. And if God knew the outcome, why didn’t he warn Jephathat that he would have to sacrifice his daughter? And why wasn’t Lot told that he could rescue his daughters but would lose his wife? And why would he free his people from slavery only to have them wander, homeless, for forty years?
Presbyterians believe that Man has free will and choice, but that it’s all planned out, even which choice you will make. That’s always confused me, frankly. And it gives God a power of knowing the future that I don’t think stands up to the church’s own logic.
If God knows the future, isn’t the whole exercise of our existence futile? I propose that God does not seem to dwell outside of time, therefore being able to see past and future equally. His behavior seems as utterly linear as our own. And if that’s the case, then the Apocalypse won’t be the result of Satan trying to take over the world, but rather, God knows in advance only because he is the one who will cause it.
Whether or not God knows the future is important, because if he exists as linearly as we, then all these supposed “prophecies” (though they’re not made by actual prophets) and visions of an impending apocalypse are false. It’s also important because our prayers for our future have unforeseeable outcomes – unforeseeable even by God. Show me in the Bible where it says, “God, knowing the future, left the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil unguarded, even though it would cause guilt and suffering of a million generations of man.” If God knows the future, he’s a mean (and cheating) old man.
And lastly, but not leastly, if God knew the future back when there were real prophets, why no warning to rotate crops, maintain wild areas, stay away from fossil fuels, and otherwise protect the environment, when lack of that information in advance has caused many civilizations to fall, and may ultimately result in the failure of the entire human race? Strange thing not to mention, isn’t it?
If God knows the future, why didn’t he build a fence around the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? Why didn’t he warn Abel? He warned Noah of the flood and Abraham of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Jews in slavery how to escape the Angel of Death, but these disasters God would have known about in advance because he was the one who supposedly caused them.
But note: “If a thing he said does not come to pass, he is a false prophet.” (Deut 18:22). God said David’s kingdom would last forever, and it didn’t. Jesus said the second coming would happen before his generation passed away, and as far as we know it didn’t. So aren’t both false prophets?
Unlike Abraham, Jephathat did have to sacrifice his child because of a promise he made to God. No angel stopped him, no ram appeared in the brush. And if God knew the outcome, why didn’t he warn Jephathat that he would have to sacrifice his daughter? And why wasn’t Lot told that he could rescue his daughters but would lose his wife? And why would he free his people from slavery only to have them wander, homeless, for forty years?
Presbyterians believe that Man has free will and choice, but that it’s all planned out, even which choice you will make. That’s always confused me, frankly. And it gives God a power of knowing the future that I don’t think stands up to the church’s own logic.
If God knows the future, isn’t the whole exercise of our existence futile? I propose that God does not seem to dwell outside of time, therefore being able to see past and future equally. His behavior seems as utterly linear as our own. And if that’s the case, then the Apocalypse won’t be the result of Satan trying to take over the world, but rather, God knows in advance only because he is the one who will cause it.
Whether or not God knows the future is important, because if he exists as linearly as we, then all these supposed “prophecies” (though they’re not made by actual prophets) and visions of an impending apocalypse are false. It’s also important because our prayers for our future have unforeseeable outcomes – unforeseeable even by God. Show me in the Bible where it says, “God, knowing the future, left the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil unguarded, even though it would cause guilt and suffering of a million generations of man.” If God knows the future, he’s a mean (and cheating) old man.
And lastly, but not leastly, if God knew the future back when there were real prophets, why no warning to rotate crops, maintain wild areas, stay away from fossil fuels, and otherwise protect the environment, when lack of that information in advance has caused many civilizations to fall, and may ultimately result in the failure of the entire human race? Strange thing not to mention, isn’t it?
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
THE CASE FOR SATAN
That which is worshipped in churches:
- Loves your money (greed)
- Encourages outdressing and outshining each other (pride)
- Forbids anyone to speak against or question anything (slavery)
- Commits genocide and encourages others to do so (murder)
- Encourages bigotry and arrogance (more pride)
- Requires parents to both brainwash and sacrifice their children (see Jephathat)
- Punishes innocent children for their parent’s sins – for FOUR generations! (crazy-talk)
How does this differ from Satan’s supposed agenda? And if God is omnipotent and omnipresent, apparently so is Satan – or how did he know how to tempt Eve (humans being an entirely new phenomenon), know when Yeshua had gone alone into the wilderness, how did he know Job? Besides omnipresent means present in everything – even the Prince of Darkness. One theory is that nothing exists outside of God, and everything is made of God. Hence he is also Satan.
If God is omnipotent and omnipresent (and Satan is, too), and God is Satan (a name that means, simply, “adversary”), God struggles with himself (Hos 11:8-9) and even regrets that he created man (Gen 6:6). In fact, this means God is responsible for both good AND evil. And if we’re created in his image, doesn’t that explain a lot?
Perhaps it’s not that God is evil, but more that he is schizophrenic, sometimes blessing us and making lovely promises, sometimes taking sick delight in our suffering and destruction. The Adversary takes on a whole different meaning when we consider that it is God struggling with himself; it explains why God has regrets and indecision. Why Abraham has to remind him to be just, for instance. But if God is schizophrenic, then he isn’t perfect, is he? But there is a kind of beauty in this paradox; what if God created man to have someone to share the struggle, or even as an experiment to see whether one side or the other would ever win? But the Bible never mentions this easily-explained description.
Don't get me wrong; I don’t mean to say that I support Satanism, only that the god of Satanists seems the same as the Christians’. I believe they even use the same Bible, only upside-down. If God is divided against himself, and we’re created in his image, well, there you go! No wonder believers preach humility out of one side of their mouth and arrogance out of the other.
Once again, the Church is hoist by its own system of belief. It does that rather often, doesn't it? Perhaps the Bible was written by schizophrenics?
- Loves your money (greed)
- Encourages outdressing and outshining each other (pride)
- Forbids anyone to speak against or question anything (slavery)
- Commits genocide and encourages others to do so (murder)
- Encourages bigotry and arrogance (more pride)
- Requires parents to both brainwash and sacrifice their children (see Jephathat)
- Punishes innocent children for their parent’s sins – for FOUR generations! (crazy-talk)
How does this differ from Satan’s supposed agenda? And if God is omnipotent and omnipresent, apparently so is Satan – or how did he know how to tempt Eve (humans being an entirely new phenomenon), know when Yeshua had gone alone into the wilderness, how did he know Job? Besides omnipresent means present in everything – even the Prince of Darkness. One theory is that nothing exists outside of God, and everything is made of God. Hence he is also Satan.
If God is omnipotent and omnipresent (and Satan is, too), and God is Satan (a name that means, simply, “adversary”), God struggles with himself (Hos 11:8-9) and even regrets that he created man (Gen 6:6). In fact, this means God is responsible for both good AND evil. And if we’re created in his image, doesn’t that explain a lot?
Perhaps it’s not that God is evil, but more that he is schizophrenic, sometimes blessing us and making lovely promises, sometimes taking sick delight in our suffering and destruction. The Adversary takes on a whole different meaning when we consider that it is God struggling with himself; it explains why God has regrets and indecision. Why Abraham has to remind him to be just, for instance. But if God is schizophrenic, then he isn’t perfect, is he? But there is a kind of beauty in this paradox; what if God created man to have someone to share the struggle, or even as an experiment to see whether one side or the other would ever win? But the Bible never mentions this easily-explained description.
Don't get me wrong; I don’t mean to say that I support Satanism, only that the god of Satanists seems the same as the Christians’. I believe they even use the same Bible, only upside-down. If God is divided against himself, and we’re created in his image, well, there you go! No wonder believers preach humility out of one side of their mouth and arrogance out of the other.
Once again, the Church is hoist by its own system of belief. It does that rather often, doesn't it? Perhaps the Bible was written by schizophrenics?
Sunday, October 18, 2009
WELCOME
Thank you for joining this discussion! This conversation is about discrediting the Christian Church and the Christian God by using their own holy book to disprove their claims. It’s about refusing to believe in a thing that won’t hang together logically or admit of reason, and can’t bear up under questioning (in fact, won’t allow it). This church is still gleefully burning books (?) encouraging bigotry (such as that against abortion doctors), still adamantly against science (while broadcasting to millions using every high-tech gadget they can possibly use). Fundamentalists believe Barak O’Bama is the anti-Christ (for the apparently sever crime of being charming) and that his health care reform is but the first step in establishing a New World Order; so add conspiracy theory enthusiasts to the list of their strange beliefs.
Naturally they believe (as some in every generation do) that these are the very end times (really this time), in which case they see no advantage in things like the environment or world peace – in fact they often pray for Armageddon – the war to end all wars – to arrive soon.
When egomaniacal gurus from foreign countries are exposed as frauds, there’s a general attitude that anyone who believed their weird credo deserves to have been taken advantage of. But when it’s an egomaniacal Christian, no one seems very concerned, and they go right on believing the weird credo, despite the number of frauds exposed. It’s exactly like psychic phenomenon versus prayer effects and miracles; why does one require extraordinary proof while the other requires none at all?
It’s time to tear away the mystical "handkerchief of invisibility" from the Christian religion and judge it on its actual merits. Doing so can have only one outcome, since their beliefs don’t even agree with themselves.
Please feel free to leave your comments supporting either side of the discussion, and I hope you’ll return soon!
Naturally they believe (as some in every generation do) that these are the very end times (really this time), in which case they see no advantage in things like the environment or world peace – in fact they often pray for Armageddon – the war to end all wars – to arrive soon.
When egomaniacal gurus from foreign countries are exposed as frauds, there’s a general attitude that anyone who believed their weird credo deserves to have been taken advantage of. But when it’s an egomaniacal Christian, no one seems very concerned, and they go right on believing the weird credo, despite the number of frauds exposed. It’s exactly like psychic phenomenon versus prayer effects and miracles; why does one require extraordinary proof while the other requires none at all?
It’s time to tear away the mystical "handkerchief of invisibility" from the Christian religion and judge it on its actual merits. Doing so can have only one outcome, since their beliefs don’t even agree with themselves.
Please feel free to leave your comments supporting either side of the discussion, and I hope you’ll return soon!
Saturday, October 17, 2009
BAPTISTS GLEEFULLY BURNING BOOKS!? WHA?
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/civil-religion/general/2009/10/halloween-book-burning-at-baptist-church-to-include-copies-of-the-bible/
Sunday, October 11, 2009
LABELS
Perhaps I’ve been mistaken in calling myself a Rationalist…it’s not so much that I believe we have the ability to figure it all out (I suspect we don’t), but I believe we do have the ability to reject things that don’t make sense. I fully grant you there may be a being or beings which we cannot apprehend, much less comprehend. But since that’s unknowable, what is there to discuss?
Maybe I should call myself a REALIST? The reality is, though some people are miraculously healed at Lourdes, pious millions who visit there are not. Therefore, I have a better chance of winning the lottery than obtaining a cure there. That’s just being Realistic, isn’t it?
I don’t want to be counted as a screaming atheist along with worshippers of the Nephilim of Ur or the inhabitants of Mu, or those who pray to UFOs. As far as I can tell, these are just more myths, no thank you.
“Agnostic” seems to imply I can’t make up my mind, which isn’t true. I believe that if there is a supreme being, I cannot (or at least, in spite of trying, have not) see anything to prove his or her existence. And I cannot see anything showing he or she wants us to know of his or her existence. The god I see others trying to believe in is immoral and amoral, not even meeting the standards I hold out for my own self, surely a sociopath of sophistication, a sadist, and less good than man.
If God is unknowable, as it seems clear He is, then what’s the purpose of worship? If there is a Supreme Being, why does It need my worship? Why does it need us to wipe out whole peoples who are no different than we? If God is good, how could SACRIFICE of innocent creatures PLEASE Him? Or the smell of burning offal? (“I created you all, now I want to see you DIE!”?) Or war? How can it need my money, of which I have little enough? And lastly, what does God need with a starship? Your God sounds like Satan to me.
So as a Realist, if you believe evolution, then you must realize there is only one hand at the wheel – yours. Now you could spend a hundred hours praying, but if you’re a realist, you should spend a hundred hours DOING. And of the two, which do you think will get what they wanted?
I don’t feel that everything needs to be explained. Why have we evolved to love? What does it matter? The fact is, we love. That we can know. So when making plans, we should take that into account. We know a certain proportion of the population at any time is homosexual, so let’s take that into account as well. Let’s stop ignoring what we know to be true, eh?
Or maybe I’m a Humanist – I do believe in human rights and human responsibilities. I’m not a pagan, I’m clear on that much. But all these labels are creaking old, having been around so long they have their own set of matched luggage and an infinity of frequent-flyer miles. Perhaps that’s why the Brights made up a whole new name for it. Henceforth, I shall know myself to be a “Bright.” Maybe it’s just another label, but I’m willing to try it on to see if it fits. You can join, too at: http://the-brights.net/
Maybe I should call myself a REALIST? The reality is, though some people are miraculously healed at Lourdes, pious millions who visit there are not. Therefore, I have a better chance of winning the lottery than obtaining a cure there. That’s just being Realistic, isn’t it?
I don’t want to be counted as a screaming atheist along with worshippers of the Nephilim of Ur or the inhabitants of Mu, or those who pray to UFOs. As far as I can tell, these are just more myths, no thank you.
“Agnostic” seems to imply I can’t make up my mind, which isn’t true. I believe that if there is a supreme being, I cannot (or at least, in spite of trying, have not) see anything to prove his or her existence. And I cannot see anything showing he or she wants us to know of his or her existence. The god I see others trying to believe in is immoral and amoral, not even meeting the standards I hold out for my own self, surely a sociopath of sophistication, a sadist, and less good than man.
If God is unknowable, as it seems clear He is, then what’s the purpose of worship? If there is a Supreme Being, why does It need my worship? Why does it need us to wipe out whole peoples who are no different than we? If God is good, how could SACRIFICE of innocent creatures PLEASE Him? Or the smell of burning offal? (“I created you all, now I want to see you DIE!”?) Or war? How can it need my money, of which I have little enough? And lastly, what does God need with a starship? Your God sounds like Satan to me.
So as a Realist, if you believe evolution, then you must realize there is only one hand at the wheel – yours. Now you could spend a hundred hours praying, but if you’re a realist, you should spend a hundred hours DOING. And of the two, which do you think will get what they wanted?
I don’t feel that everything needs to be explained. Why have we evolved to love? What does it matter? The fact is, we love. That we can know. So when making plans, we should take that into account. We know a certain proportion of the population at any time is homosexual, so let’s take that into account as well. Let’s stop ignoring what we know to be true, eh?
Or maybe I’m a Humanist – I do believe in human rights and human responsibilities. I’m not a pagan, I’m clear on that much. But all these labels are creaking old, having been around so long they have their own set of matched luggage and an infinity of frequent-flyer miles. Perhaps that’s why the Brights made up a whole new name for it. Henceforth, I shall know myself to be a “Bright.” Maybe it’s just another label, but I’m willing to try it on to see if it fits. You can join, too at: http://the-brights.net/
Saturday, October 10, 2009
BY THEIR TEACHINGS KNOW THEM
We’ve shared many quotes by wise men and great leaders, but perhaps it’s time to hear what the other side (Unwise Teachers?) has to say:
It's good to trust others but, not to do so is much better. We become strong, I feel, when we have no friends upon whom to lean, or to look to for moral guidance.
- Benito Mussolini, born 1883 CE, Roman Catholic
Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs. I trust no one, not even myself.
- Joseph Stalin, born 1878 CE, Atheist
They are in a dilemma, they are in trouble now. Hate them and strike them.
The west need someone to tell the man who walks around with the biggest stick in the world, that that stick can`t bring down God`s house.
- Saddam Hussein, born 1937 CE, Sunni Muslim
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.
Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.
As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.
He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.
It is not truth that matters, but victory.
- Adolf Hitler, born 1889 CE, Catholic
We say the name of God, but that is only habit.
The more bombers, the less room for doves of peace.
- Nikita Khrushchev, born 1894 CE, Atheist
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.
One man with a gun can control 100 without one.
- Vladamir Ilyich Lenin, born 1870 CE, no religion of record
Where the sayings of Wise Teachers are about our connectedness to all things, these men speak only of dis-connectedness. If all of us follow the admonishments of Mussolini and Stalin, no one would trust anyone. Imagine what a world that would be! Truth would be valueless, love would be impossible. History frowns on these, but at the time they were followed by millions. Don’t allow yourself to be led blindly. Be led wisely. You can know the wise by their teachings. But go carefully; you should follow the wise one’s teachings, but not the rituals, wars, or religions which grow up after him.
It's good to trust others but, not to do so is much better. We become strong, I feel, when we have no friends upon whom to lean, or to look to for moral guidance.
- Benito Mussolini, born 1883 CE, Roman Catholic
Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs. I trust no one, not even myself.
- Joseph Stalin, born 1878 CE, Atheist
They are in a dilemma, they are in trouble now. Hate them and strike them.
The west need someone to tell the man who walks around with the biggest stick in the world, that that stick can`t bring down God`s house.
- Saddam Hussein, born 1937 CE, Sunni Muslim
How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.
Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.
As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.
He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.
It is not truth that matters, but victory.
- Adolf Hitler, born 1889 CE, Catholic
We say the name of God, but that is only habit.
The more bombers, the less room for doves of peace.
- Nikita Khrushchev, born 1894 CE, Atheist
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.
One man with a gun can control 100 without one.
- Vladamir Ilyich Lenin, born 1870 CE, no religion of record
Where the sayings of Wise Teachers are about our connectedness to all things, these men speak only of dis-connectedness. If all of us follow the admonishments of Mussolini and Stalin, no one would trust anyone. Imagine what a world that would be! Truth would be valueless, love would be impossible. History frowns on these, but at the time they were followed by millions. Don’t allow yourself to be led blindly. Be led wisely. You can know the wise by their teachings. But go carefully; you should follow the wise one’s teachings, but not the rituals, wars, or religions which grow up after him.
Friday, October 9, 2009
MORE WISE TEACHINGS
“Blessed is the servant who loves his brother as much when he is sick and useless as when he is well and can be of service to him. And blessed is he who loves his brother as well when he is afar off as when he is by his side, and who would say nothing behind his back he might not, in love, say before his face.”
- Francis of Assisi, born 1181 CE, Catholic, Founder of The Franciscan Order
If the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowlege: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.
- Charles Darwin, born 1809 CE, Agnostic
This above all, to thine own self be true, and then it shall follow as night the day, thou cannot be false to any man.
- William Shakespeare, born 1564 CE, Baptised in Christian Church
The teachings of all wise men – great men – are the same; be kind, be active for charity and for peace. These teachings don’t come from churches. Listen; most of them rebelled against churches, yet churches are sometimes made after them but never BY them. Just think about that. Churches are built on the teachings of those who defied the church. Mohammed never entered an Islamic temple, Jesus never entered a Christian church.
King Solomon (believed by some to be the wisest man who ever lived) was not so wise as not to sin – but (supposedly for the late King David’s sake) is spared punishment. This is odd, because no punishment was spared David himself. It’s almost as if God had regrets.
The ‘narrow way,’ the correct path, and true wisdom all lie outside the church. This gentle way is the opposite of “I have to think of myself first.” More important that you should think FOR yourself.
“There is nothing in the holy fountains but water; I know, for I’ve been swimming in them. There is nothing in the holy books but works, I know for I have been looking through them.”
- Kabir
It is true that “Man cannot live by bread alone,” (Matt 4:4) but he also needs more than sacred water and sacred books. He needs the ineffable, subtle, and gentle service to his fellow creatures; listen! This is the path, the way, the truth, the life. Follow the words of the wise, not the words of their worshippers, preachers, interpreters and other obfuscationists!
- Francis of Assisi, born 1181 CE, Catholic, Founder of The Franciscan Order
If the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowlege: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.
- Charles Darwin, born 1809 CE, Agnostic
This above all, to thine own self be true, and then it shall follow as night the day, thou cannot be false to any man.
- William Shakespeare, born 1564 CE, Baptised in Christian Church
The teachings of all wise men – great men – are the same; be kind, be active for charity and for peace. These teachings don’t come from churches. Listen; most of them rebelled against churches, yet churches are sometimes made after them but never BY them. Just think about that. Churches are built on the teachings of those who defied the church. Mohammed never entered an Islamic temple, Jesus never entered a Christian church.
King Solomon (believed by some to be the wisest man who ever lived) was not so wise as not to sin – but (supposedly for the late King David’s sake) is spared punishment. This is odd, because no punishment was spared David himself. It’s almost as if God had regrets.
The ‘narrow way,’ the correct path, and true wisdom all lie outside the church. This gentle way is the opposite of “I have to think of myself first.” More important that you should think FOR yourself.
“There is nothing in the holy fountains but water; I know, for I’ve been swimming in them. There is nothing in the holy books but works, I know for I have been looking through them.”
- Kabir
It is true that “Man cannot live by bread alone,” (Matt 4:4) but he also needs more than sacred water and sacred books. He needs the ineffable, subtle, and gentle service to his fellow creatures; listen! This is the path, the way, the truth, the life. Follow the words of the wise, not the words of their worshippers, preachers, interpreters and other obfuscationists!
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
MORE WISE TEACHINGS WITHOUT RELIGION
We know that the white man does not understand our ways. One portion of the land is the same to him as the next, for he is a stranger who comes in the night and takes from the land whatever he needs. The earth is not his brother, but his enemy - and when he has conquered it, he moves on. He leaves his fathers' graves, and his children’s birthright is forgotten.
The Indian prefers the soft sound of the wind darting over the face of the pond, the smell of the wind itself cleansed by a midday rain, or scented with pinon pine. The air is precious to the red man, for all things are the same breath - the animals, the trees, the man.
The whites, too, shall pass - perhaps sooner than other tribes. Continue to contaminate your own bed, and you might suffocate in your own waste.
Today is fair. Tomorrow may be overcast with clouds. My words are like the stars that never change.
We are part of the earth and the earth is part of us. The earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth.
What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected.
- Chief Seattle (Sealth), statesman, philosopher, born 1786 CE
I do not recognize castes and races. I behold only one humanity. I am working for mankind.Keep undiminished kindness toward all beings and also the spirit of self-sacrifice. Kindle the light in yourself, then kindle it in others. Like spreading light by lightning one candle from another all around a room, so we should spread love from heart to heart.
- Haidakhan Babaji, yogi, born twentieth century CE(or immortal) (Hindu)
Therefore, perform righteous actions, for action is better than inaction; being idle, one cannot support even one’s own body.
- Krishna, prince, born 3228 BCE (founder of Hinduism)
O servant, where dost thou seek Me? Lo! I am beside thee. I am neither in temple nor in mosque: I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash: Neither am I in rites and ceremonies, nor in Yoga and renunciation. If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me: thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time. Kabîr says, "O Sadhu! God is the breath of all breath.
(From “Songs of Kabir,” translated by Rbindranath Tagore)
- Kabir (Kabīra) weaver, reformer, born 1398 CE (Hindu, Muslim, Bhakti)
I am neither Christian nor Jew, neither Zoroastrian nor Muslim, I am not from east or west, not from land or sea, not from the shafts of nature nor from the spheres of the firmament, not of the earth, not of water, not of air, not of fire. I am not from the highest heaven, not from this world, not from existence, not from being. I am not from India, not from China, not from Bulgar, not from Saqsin, not from the realm of the two Iraqs, not from the land of Khurasan I am not from the world, not from beyond, not from heaven and not from hell. I am not from Adam, not from Eve, not from paradise and not from Ridwan.
I searched for God among the Christians and on the Cross and therein I found Him not.
I went into the ancient temples of idolatry; no trace of Him was there. I entered the mountain cave of Hira and then went as far as Qandhar but God I found not. With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Caucasus and found there only 'anqa's habitation. Then I directed my search to the Kaaba, the resort of old and young; God was not there even. Turning to philosophy I inquired about him from ibn Sina but found Him not within his range. I fared then to the scene of the Prophet's experience of a great divine manifestation only a "two bow-lengths' distance from him" but God was not there even in that exalted court. Finally, I looked into my own heart and there I saw Him; He was nowhere else.
- Rumi (Mawlānā Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Balkhī aka Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Rūmī), poet, mystic, born 1207 CE (Sunni Muslim)
Yes I am [a Hindu]. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew.
- Ghandi (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi) lawyer, reformer, born 1869 CE (Hindu)
Shall I not inform you of a better act than fasting, alms, and prayers? Making peace between one another: enmity and malice tear up heavenly rewards by the roots.
- Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh, shepherd, reformer, born 570 CE (founder of Islam)
Kindness in words creates confidence. Kindness in thinking creates profoundness. Kindness in giving creates love. If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading.
- LAO TSE (Laozi), Keeper of Archives, hermit, born 570 BCE (founder of Taoism)
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear. In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King, Jr., minister and reformer, born 1929 CE (Baptist)
Immortality can be reached only by continuous acts of kindness; Perfection is accomplished by compassion and charity. That which is most needed is a loving heart!
- Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama), prince, reformer, born 420-563 BC (founder of Buddhism)
As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.
What is serving God? Tis doing Good to Man.
- Benjamin Franklin, statesman, inventor, born 1704 CE (no professed religion)
The Indian prefers the soft sound of the wind darting over the face of the pond, the smell of the wind itself cleansed by a midday rain, or scented with pinon pine. The air is precious to the red man, for all things are the same breath - the animals, the trees, the man.
The whites, too, shall pass - perhaps sooner than other tribes. Continue to contaminate your own bed, and you might suffocate in your own waste.
Today is fair. Tomorrow may be overcast with clouds. My words are like the stars that never change.
We are part of the earth and the earth is part of us. The earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth.
What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected.
- Chief Seattle (Sealth), statesman, philosopher, born 1786 CE
I do not recognize castes and races. I behold only one humanity. I am working for mankind.Keep undiminished kindness toward all beings and also the spirit of self-sacrifice. Kindle the light in yourself, then kindle it in others. Like spreading light by lightning one candle from another all around a room, so we should spread love from heart to heart.
- Haidakhan Babaji, yogi, born twentieth century CE(or immortal) (Hindu)
Therefore, perform righteous actions, for action is better than inaction; being idle, one cannot support even one’s own body.
- Krishna, prince, born 3228 BCE (founder of Hinduism)
O servant, where dost thou seek Me? Lo! I am beside thee. I am neither in temple nor in mosque: I am neither in Kaaba nor in Kailash: Neither am I in rites and ceremonies, nor in Yoga and renunciation. If thou art a true seeker, thou shalt at once see Me: thou shalt meet Me in a moment of time. Kabîr says, "O Sadhu! God is the breath of all breath.
(From “Songs of Kabir,” translated by Rbindranath Tagore)
- Kabir (Kabīra) weaver, reformer, born 1398 CE (Hindu, Muslim, Bhakti)
I am neither Christian nor Jew, neither Zoroastrian nor Muslim, I am not from east or west, not from land or sea, not from the shafts of nature nor from the spheres of the firmament, not of the earth, not of water, not of air, not of fire. I am not from the highest heaven, not from this world, not from existence, not from being. I am not from India, not from China, not from Bulgar, not from Saqsin, not from the realm of the two Iraqs, not from the land of Khurasan I am not from the world, not from beyond, not from heaven and not from hell. I am not from Adam, not from Eve, not from paradise and not from Ridwan.
I searched for God among the Christians and on the Cross and therein I found Him not.
I went into the ancient temples of idolatry; no trace of Him was there. I entered the mountain cave of Hira and then went as far as Qandhar but God I found not. With set purpose I fared to the summit of Mount Caucasus and found there only 'anqa's habitation. Then I directed my search to the Kaaba, the resort of old and young; God was not there even. Turning to philosophy I inquired about him from ibn Sina but found Him not within his range. I fared then to the scene of the Prophet's experience of a great divine manifestation only a "two bow-lengths' distance from him" but God was not there even in that exalted court. Finally, I looked into my own heart and there I saw Him; He was nowhere else.
- Rumi (Mawlānā Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Balkhī aka Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Rūmī), poet, mystic, born 1207 CE (Sunni Muslim)
Yes I am [a Hindu]. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew.
- Ghandi (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi) lawyer, reformer, born 1869 CE (Hindu)
Shall I not inform you of a better act than fasting, alms, and prayers? Making peace between one another: enmity and malice tear up heavenly rewards by the roots.
- Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh, shepherd, reformer, born 570 CE (founder of Islam)
Kindness in words creates confidence. Kindness in thinking creates profoundness. Kindness in giving creates love. If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading.
- LAO TSE (Laozi), Keeper of Archives, hermit, born 570 BCE (founder of Taoism)
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear. In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.
- Martin Luther King, Jr., minister and reformer, born 1929 CE (Baptist)
Immortality can be reached only by continuous acts of kindness; Perfection is accomplished by compassion and charity. That which is most needed is a loving heart!
- Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama), prince, reformer, born 420-563 BC (founder of Buddhism)
As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.
What is serving God? Tis doing Good to Man.
- Benjamin Franklin, statesman, inventor, born 1704 CE (no professed religion)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
CALLING BULLSHIT II
COMMERCIAL BULLSHIT
Whatever you do, don’t fall for these “No Risk” trials. You’ll find there IS a risk – let’s say you love the product. It takes you about 20 days to use up the 15-day trial’s worth of sample. Should you go to order yourself some more, you’ll find you’ve already been billed for 30 days’ more worth, which is in the mail. Now if you have plenty of money to throw around, that’s fine. If you don’t, it could be a disaster. And until you cancel your “automatic subscription” (which was part of the fine print on the “risk-free” trial), you’ll keep getting charged, whether you’re out of product at the time or not, whether you want it or not, whether you can afford it or not.
Let’s say you DON’T love the product. It takes you about 5 minutes to realize you in fact HATE it. Now you must act quickly, as though you had no other obligations, because you must return the product within the 15 days so as not to be billed for the next installment. You’ll probably get return instructions from the company, telling you in very exacting terms when and where and how you will mail this return. From the package you can clearly see that shipping the package to you only cost $.99, but you find that cleaving to their returns policy, it’ll cost you $6.99 or more to return this 3-ounce container. If you’re trying to return a home gym – I can’t even imagine what the charge might be. Now, don’t miss the deadline, because if you do, you’ll find you’ve been charged for a one-month (not a 15-day) supply, and also for the next month’s order.
So “No Risk” is quite a relative term, and good luck trying to get some customer service from people who keep useless business hours and put you on a telephone carousel semi-permanently (it may be permanent, I’ve never waited it out). I’d say there’s a risk.
Also, listen (or read) carefully. This new miracle diet drug might have fine print that says “with proper diet and exercise,” and unless you’re able to provide them with a log of your food intake and calorie outgo, they may not be obligated to live up to their claims. It’s not false advertising, so long as they’re slipped in the “diet and exercise” clause. And the truth is, if you use proper diet and exercise, you don’t need their product.
As for anti-aging claims, (watch for that “proper diet and exercise” clause) please – those before and after photos – I mean, watch the final scene of Jurassic Park – special effects experts can make Queen Elizabeth look like a velociraptor for heaven’s sake. Of course the earnest user (who is a well-paid actor) will look better – they could make him or her look like anything. A teapot. No matter how much their story sounds like your own, remember; they’re trying to sell you something.
You may think you’re protected by laws that forbid false advertising, but are you prepared to sue? Because it takes a court case to enforce your rights. Can you afford a lawyer, and even if you can, do you WANT to hire one? Advertisers COUNT on your reluctance or inability to sue. Why buy a thing on television anyway, when you know they’ve made it look much nicer than it is and gurgled on about the quality (as they are well-paid to do)? If you must buy a diamond ring, try a jeweler; they’ll treat you like royalty, and you'll be able to see and touch what you're getting BEFORE you buy it.
NOTE: Thanks today to Morgan for the great link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/09/30/first.blasphemy.day/
Whatever you do, don’t fall for these “No Risk” trials. You’ll find there IS a risk – let’s say you love the product. It takes you about 20 days to use up the 15-day trial’s worth of sample. Should you go to order yourself some more, you’ll find you’ve already been billed for 30 days’ more worth, which is in the mail. Now if you have plenty of money to throw around, that’s fine. If you don’t, it could be a disaster. And until you cancel your “automatic subscription” (which was part of the fine print on the “risk-free” trial), you’ll keep getting charged, whether you’re out of product at the time or not, whether you want it or not, whether you can afford it or not.
Let’s say you DON’T love the product. It takes you about 5 minutes to realize you in fact HATE it. Now you must act quickly, as though you had no other obligations, because you must return the product within the 15 days so as not to be billed for the next installment. You’ll probably get return instructions from the company, telling you in very exacting terms when and where and how you will mail this return. From the package you can clearly see that shipping the package to you only cost $.99, but you find that cleaving to their returns policy, it’ll cost you $6.99 or more to return this 3-ounce container. If you’re trying to return a home gym – I can’t even imagine what the charge might be. Now, don’t miss the deadline, because if you do, you’ll find you’ve been charged for a one-month (not a 15-day) supply, and also for the next month’s order.
So “No Risk” is quite a relative term, and good luck trying to get some customer service from people who keep useless business hours and put you on a telephone carousel semi-permanently (it may be permanent, I’ve never waited it out). I’d say there’s a risk.
Also, listen (or read) carefully. This new miracle diet drug might have fine print that says “with proper diet and exercise,” and unless you’re able to provide them with a log of your food intake and calorie outgo, they may not be obligated to live up to their claims. It’s not false advertising, so long as they’re slipped in the “diet and exercise” clause. And the truth is, if you use proper diet and exercise, you don’t need their product.
As for anti-aging claims, (watch for that “proper diet and exercise” clause) please – those before and after photos – I mean, watch the final scene of Jurassic Park – special effects experts can make Queen Elizabeth look like a velociraptor for heaven’s sake. Of course the earnest user (who is a well-paid actor) will look better – they could make him or her look like anything. A teapot. No matter how much their story sounds like your own, remember; they’re trying to sell you something.
You may think you’re protected by laws that forbid false advertising, but are you prepared to sue? Because it takes a court case to enforce your rights. Can you afford a lawyer, and even if you can, do you WANT to hire one? Advertisers COUNT on your reluctance or inability to sue. Why buy a thing on television anyway, when you know they’ve made it look much nicer than it is and gurgled on about the quality (as they are well-paid to do)? If you must buy a diamond ring, try a jeweler; they’ll treat you like royalty, and you'll be able to see and touch what you're getting BEFORE you buy it.
NOTE: Thanks today to Morgan for the great link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/09/30/first.blasphemy.day/
Monday, October 5, 2009
CALLING BULLSHIT
There are people alive today who believe they are the Messiah (and they have their own churches, as well!). There are people alive today who believe God has given them a mission to destroy certain "kinds" of people. There are people alive today who believe the planet will be ‘saved’ by Divine or alien intervention. There are people alive today who believe Queen Elizabeth is an alien. There are people alive today who believe that women are of inferior intelligence and self-control, and must therefore be obedient to men. There are people alive today that believe that if your skin is a different color, you are not quite human. These people do not live far away from you; they are your next-door neighbors. This is not happening in another country or another time. It is happening in your country, on your street, right now.
If someone walks up to me and tells me he is an alien, I would ask him, “How can I know what you say is true?” And it’d better be a darn good proof. Special effects showing that Queen Elizabeth is actually a reptile are not going to do the job. That's what I call "Calling Bullshit."
If someone walks up to me and tells me he is the Son of God, I might be tempted to ask the same thing, except my background would probably show through; “How can you allow such injustice?” And it’d better be a darn good proof. Talk is not going to do the job, nor sleight-of-hand, nor unempirical miracles.
And if someone walks up to me and tells me he’s found all the secrets of the universe, he’d better have more than obscure/inexplicable mathematics as proof.
Every generation since the idea of an apocalypse was first thought of has sincerely believed itself to be the “last generation.” History is replete with examples of people who’ve predicted the end of the world or the arrival of aliens, and these all have one thing in common; uh…nothing happened. Anyone who asks me to sell everything and meet them on any kind of “landing field” is going to face some pretty serious questions from me.
MY PERSONAL *RELIGIOUS* BULLSHITOMETER:
1. Do I have to take someone else’s word (or interpretation) for it, or is there physical evidence anyone can see?** Corollary: If I have to take someone else’s word for it, how do I know they can be trusted?
2. Will it work even if I am a skeptic, putting out negative vibrations?
3. Is it cohesive? That is, does it contradict itself, or is it consistent?
4. Does someone profit (in dollars or fame) from my belief? (We’re all trying to make a living…)
5. Is it open to question, revision, change, accountability?
6. Is it sane? That is, does it match with reality?
7. Is it noble and good, or does it hurt people (or their rights)?
8. Can it be repeated?
9. Does it change anything (to know about this)?
Regarding Resurrection: There’s as much evidence for The Resurrection as there is that Elvis is still alive. If you believe in one, why not both? I call bullshit on that.
Miracles: In many cases the miracles performed by Yeshua are copied almost word for word from the miracles of other (Old Testament) figures. Even bringing the dead back to life was a re-run.
Given their track record, I might also add “Does it have anything to do with crop circles, Easter Island, the Nazca lines, Nephilim, or the magic properties of crystalline rocks?” Because I’m getting quite weary of those. Also, beware: the fact that there is internet footage available of the “latest discovery,” does not make it true. Look to reliable sources (such as http://www.newscientist.com or http://www.archaeology.org) before you believe it.
If someone walks up to me and tells me he is an alien, I would ask him, “How can I know what you say is true?” And it’d better be a darn good proof. Special effects showing that Queen Elizabeth is actually a reptile are not going to do the job. That's what I call "Calling Bullshit."
If someone walks up to me and tells me he is the Son of God, I might be tempted to ask the same thing, except my background would probably show through; “How can you allow such injustice?” And it’d better be a darn good proof. Talk is not going to do the job, nor sleight-of-hand, nor unempirical miracles.
And if someone walks up to me and tells me he’s found all the secrets of the universe, he’d better have more than obscure/inexplicable mathematics as proof.
Every generation since the idea of an apocalypse was first thought of has sincerely believed itself to be the “last generation.” History is replete with examples of people who’ve predicted the end of the world or the arrival of aliens, and these all have one thing in common; uh…nothing happened. Anyone who asks me to sell everything and meet them on any kind of “landing field” is going to face some pretty serious questions from me.
MY PERSONAL *RELIGIOUS* BULLSHITOMETER:
1. Do I have to take someone else’s word (or interpretation) for it, or is there physical evidence anyone can see?** Corollary: If I have to take someone else’s word for it, how do I know they can be trusted?
2. Will it work even if I am a skeptic, putting out negative vibrations?
3. Is it cohesive? That is, does it contradict itself, or is it consistent?
4. Does someone profit (in dollars or fame) from my belief? (We’re all trying to make a living…)
5. Is it open to question, revision, change, accountability?
6. Is it sane? That is, does it match with reality?
7. Is it noble and good, or does it hurt people (or their rights)?
8. Can it be repeated?
9. Does it change anything (to know about this)?
Regarding Resurrection: There’s as much evidence for The Resurrection as there is that Elvis is still alive. If you believe in one, why not both? I call bullshit on that.
Miracles: In many cases the miracles performed by Yeshua are copied almost word for word from the miracles of other (Old Testament) figures. Even bringing the dead back to life was a re-run.
Given their track record, I might also add “Does it have anything to do with crop circles, Easter Island, the Nazca lines, Nephilim, or the magic properties of crystalline rocks?” Because I’m getting quite weary of those. Also, beware: the fact that there is internet footage available of the “latest discovery,” does not make it true. Look to reliable sources (such as http://www.newscientist.com or http://www.archaeology.org) before you believe it.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
THE POWER OF PRAYER
PRAYER HAS NO PROVABLE EFFECT ON THE RECEIVER, ONLY ON THE PRAY-ER
Why is it that people won’t believe in psychic powers because they’re unable to be reliably duplicated, when the effects of prayer can’t be reliably repeated, either, but are beyond question or doubt REAL? In a double-blind study, those who were prayed for didn’t recover from surgery any faster, nor were their surgeries any more successful than those who were not prayed for.
And let’s remember, for every ‘miracle of healing’ performed at a sacred site, there are thousands, tens of thousands, in some cases millions of penitent visitors who are NOT cured.
Every priest, minister, rabbi, and imam worthy of his or her vocation (including the Pope) has prayed for peace. FOR CENTURIES. But the world has never been at peace. We can pray now for God to save our ecology, but as the prayer for peace mentioned above illustrates, it’s probably not going to happen. Pray for our planet if you wish, but then get up, go out, and make it happen! Just as you should do for peace.
Why is it that people won’t believe in psychic powers because they’re unable to be reliably duplicated, when the effects of prayer can’t be reliably repeated, either, but are beyond question or doubt REAL? In a double-blind study, those who were prayed for didn’t recover from surgery any faster, nor were their surgeries any more successful than those who were not prayed for.
And let’s remember, for every ‘miracle of healing’ performed at a sacred site, there are thousands, tens of thousands, in some cases millions of penitent visitors who are NOT cured.
Every priest, minister, rabbi, and imam worthy of his or her vocation (including the Pope) has prayed for peace. FOR CENTURIES. But the world has never been at peace. We can pray now for God to save our ecology, but as the prayer for peace mentioned above illustrates, it’s probably not going to happen. Pray for our planet if you wish, but then get up, go out, and make it happen! Just as you should do for peace.
Friday, October 2, 2009
RATIONALISTS SPEAK
According to Bill Maher, 20% of adults now say they are Rationaists. He didn’t offer the name or date (or anything useful) about the poll or survey he was citing. But there’s no doubt that the Rationalist ranks are growing.
No rights implied.
“There are other similar ‘savior figures’ in the same neighborhood at the same time in history: Mithras, Attis, Adonis, Osiris, Tammuz, and so forth and nobody thinks that these characters are anything but mythical and their stories are so similar (to Jesus’ story)… that it just seems like special pleading to say, ‘Oh, in this one case it really happened.’” -Robert Price, Historian
“Why should we consider the stories of Osiris, Dionysus, Adonis, Attis, Mithras, and other Pagan Mystery saviors as fables, yet come across essentially the same story told in a Jewish context and believe it to be the biography of a carpenter from Bethlehem?”
- Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy,“The Jesus Mysteries”
“Many currents fed the Jesus myth, like streams and tributaries joining to form a major river.”
-Kenneth Humphries, “Jesus Never Existed”
“…‘Defenders of the (Christian) faith’ were compelled under incessant charges of fraud to admit that Christianity was a rehash of older religions. …In fact, in their fabulous exploits and wondrous powers many of these (Pagan) gods and goddesses are virtually the same as the Christ character, as attested to by the Christian apologists themselves. In further inspecting this issue we discover that ‘Jesus Christ’ is in fact a compilation of these various gods, who were worshipped and who’s dramas were regularly played out by ancient peoples long before the Christian era.”
-Acharya S, “The Christ Conspiracy”
No rights implied.
When “the penny dropped” for me, was when I realized that Yeshua was a man. You might think this was when I stopped revering him, but that’s not the case. I was, in fact, much more in awe of the man than I had ever been of the god. Imagine a poor man (cut away all those “miracles”) who is so wise and so brave as to stand up against everything he’s been taught, against the established church, against following his people’s laws as a way to heaven. A very interesting man, indeed. I believe he was a pauper (he was a carpenter’s son, but there’s no mention of him being a carpenter himself) with a transcendent vision of peace and the brotherhood of all men. You see, the miracles, the rituals, the mythos mean nothing at all to me. But I can respect a man who says the church is not the way. Cutting out the whole mythos, one thing remains; someone caused an enormous break from Jewish tradition around 30 CE. So there you have it; I don’t claim Jesus Christ as my personal savior, but I do claim an enormous respect for a poor man called Yeshua for living by what he believed. For me, it doesn't hurt Yeshua's case at all (though "his" church will disagree) that he had a bit of a temper on him. Christians should not be put off by that fact (such as when he cursed whole cities – in which I feel certain there was at least one good man – or when he cursed an innocent fig tree for having the effrontery not to bear fruit out of season because he was hungry - I've done the same). He even cursed his own disciples pretty regularly. Christians don’t usually dwell on this side of his personality. I have the same respect for Akhenaton, who had a transcendent vision of one god being for everyone, Martin Luther for having a transcendent vision of the Word of God being for everyone, and the Buddha for having a transcendent vision of right living, right thought, right action. Wise teachers all, and all horrifyingly misunderstood at one time or another, if not altogether.
No rights implied.
“There are other similar ‘savior figures’ in the same neighborhood at the same time in history: Mithras, Attis, Adonis, Osiris, Tammuz, and so forth and nobody thinks that these characters are anything but mythical and their stories are so similar (to Jesus’ story)… that it just seems like special pleading to say, ‘Oh, in this one case it really happened.’” -Robert Price, Historian
“Why should we consider the stories of Osiris, Dionysus, Adonis, Attis, Mithras, and other Pagan Mystery saviors as fables, yet come across essentially the same story told in a Jewish context and believe it to be the biography of a carpenter from Bethlehem?”
- Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy,“The Jesus Mysteries”
“Many currents fed the Jesus myth, like streams and tributaries joining to form a major river.”
-Kenneth Humphries, “Jesus Never Existed”
“…‘Defenders of the (Christian) faith’ were compelled under incessant charges of fraud to admit that Christianity was a rehash of older religions. …In fact, in their fabulous exploits and wondrous powers many of these (Pagan) gods and goddesses are virtually the same as the Christ character, as attested to by the Christian apologists themselves. In further inspecting this issue we discover that ‘Jesus Christ’ is in fact a compilation of these various gods, who were worshipped and who’s dramas were regularly played out by ancient peoples long before the Christian era.”
-Acharya S, “The Christ Conspiracy”
No rights implied.
When “the penny dropped” for me, was when I realized that Yeshua was a man. You might think this was when I stopped revering him, but that’s not the case. I was, in fact, much more in awe of the man than I had ever been of the god. Imagine a poor man (cut away all those “miracles”) who is so wise and so brave as to stand up against everything he’s been taught, against the established church, against following his people’s laws as a way to heaven. A very interesting man, indeed. I believe he was a pauper (he was a carpenter’s son, but there’s no mention of him being a carpenter himself) with a transcendent vision of peace and the brotherhood of all men. You see, the miracles, the rituals, the mythos mean nothing at all to me. But I can respect a man who says the church is not the way. Cutting out the whole mythos, one thing remains; someone caused an enormous break from Jewish tradition around 30 CE. So there you have it; I don’t claim Jesus Christ as my personal savior, but I do claim an enormous respect for a poor man called Yeshua for living by what he believed. For me, it doesn't hurt Yeshua's case at all (though "his" church will disagree) that he had a bit of a temper on him. Christians should not be put off by that fact (such as when he cursed whole cities – in which I feel certain there was at least one good man – or when he cursed an innocent fig tree for having the effrontery not to bear fruit out of season because he was hungry - I've done the same). He even cursed his own disciples pretty regularly. Christians don’t usually dwell on this side of his personality. I have the same respect for Akhenaton, who had a transcendent vision of one god being for everyone, Martin Luther for having a transcendent vision of the Word of God being for everyone, and the Buddha for having a transcendent vision of right living, right thought, right action. Wise teachers all, and all horrifyingly misunderstood at one time or another, if not altogether.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)