tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48661321025966558362024-02-18T21:00:31.289-08:00Meaning Without GodJeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.comBlogger90125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-37544890499336062642011-01-08T11:23:00.000-08:002011-01-08T11:29:23.431-08:00The Evidence For God SHOULD Be Overwhelming. Irrefutable. So Why Is It That The Best Believers Can Come Up With Boils Down To Special Pleading and Arguments From Ignorance?<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="[JesusTortilla.jpg]" border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDUj7a1-jltATJo37e1EM_1WoJCjSJecvQRlQMyiKScMCBSnmRNJ5nxaVrDGN8tEjZHsioCNQeJ2b2ie1rHLoeH6l0UxGSV50TKbUL53H-r6wFbhSOHRdS-h2cqZ4jMR3C4lFD_EP1COZk/s1600/JesusTortilla.jpg" /></div><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In responding to Bill O'Reilly's recent expression of ignorance over how the tides are formed, comedian Stephen Colbert remarked "<a href="http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/370183/january-06-2011/bill-o-reilly-proves-god-s-existence---neil-degrasse-tyson">There must be a God because I don't know how things work</a>." This pretty much summarizes not only O'Reilly's religious ignorance, but that of MANY believers. Because whenever we ask believers to provide proof for their fantastical belief that there is an invisible sky man who holds the Universe together, intervenes in our affairs, answers our prayers, smites our enemies and bestows knowledge upon us via revelation, they ALWAYS punt, retreating into vague mutterings and hand waving to explain away the very simple fact that they do not have any evidence.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The simple fact is that if there really WAS an invisible supernatural entity intervening in our daily lives, answering our prayers, smiting His enemies and revealing knowledge to us, the evidence would be literally EVERYWHERE.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The evidence would be overwhelming.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, we have... ... ... ... silence.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">I do not for a moment doubt that most believers pray with deep and moving sincerity.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They pray with all their hearts and minds and faith, certainly with more than a 'mustard seed' of faith.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yet there is ZERO statistical evidence for the efficacy of prayer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>None.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, studies actually suggest that prayer actually makes the <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060403133554.htm">situation worse</a>. In contrast, when we look at the statistical relationship between say smoking and lung cancer, the positive relationship is astounding.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Incidence of lung cancer among smokers is <a href="http://txtwriter.com/onscience/articles/smokingcancer2.html">40 times higher</a> than among non-smokers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The same goes for obesity and heart disease where obese individuals are <a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/96/9/3248">50% (female) and 72% (male) more likely to suffer heart failures</a> than their non-obese peers.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The point is that where there is an ACTUAL causal relationship, we see OBVIOUS and STRONG trends.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If Prayer worked the way believers claim it does, the evidence of its efficacy would be absolutely overwhelming.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We would see huge discrepancies in the rates of healing between believers and non-believers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We would see believers hurling mountains into the sea.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We would see the magic of prayer all around us.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, we see nothing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, its efficacy is nothing more than statistical white noise.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And where is all the smiting?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yahweh is an angry, jealous god.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And Allah is even more of a pissy old man than John McCain.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Abrahamaic traditions are chock full of the smiting of the evildoers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where is all the smiting?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These bitchy old men like nothing better than smiting their enemies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They seem to glory in it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So why is there no evidence of the divine wrath anywhere around us?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Why are the countries with the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index">highest standards of living and the longest lifespans</a> almost uniformly the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_by_country">most godless countries on earth</a>?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why do the godless recover from life threatening illness at exactly the same rate as believers (see above)?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why are we godless secular atheists not on the receiving end of a demonstrable divine smiting on a daily basis?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where is the evidence?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And where are all of the revelations?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where are all of the theological breakthroughs?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Where is all of that divine knowledge?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Quick!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Name the most important theological discovery of the last 10 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>... ... ... How about the last 100 years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Actually, name a single theological discovery or breakthrough.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>... ... ...</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While God has stagnantly twiddled His twaddle, human beings have been quite busy, using the power of our brains and reason and rationality and science to cure the incurable, extend our lives, split the atom, crack the human genome, send humans into the heavens and an overwhelming litany of other accomplishments too voluminous to even begin to describe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Meanwhile, theology peddles the same old story it has been peddling for the last few millenia.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If some supernatural entity is really in the business of revealing knowledge, one would think that he might have done SOMETHING to advance our knowledge of the world around us in the last few thousand years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, all the heavy lifting has been done by us poor benighted losers cursed with the taint of original sin.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So where is He?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why is He always hiding?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Why is He always retreating?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Gods have always been shy, first hiding on the tops of mythological mountains, then retreating to the upper atmosphere, then out into space, but it's getting ridiculous.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> God clearly has some pathological </span>God now exists in some aspatial atemporal neverneverland that is everywhere and nowhere and everywhen and nowhen at the same time.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If a hyperintelligent entity is busy intermeddling in our affairs, responding out our supplications, dispensing justice, smiting the unbelievers and bestowing knowledge upon us, there should be more than a ancient handful of internally contradictory, logically inconsistent and factually erroneous documents to demonstrate the truth of such a hypothesis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If such a thing were actually true there should be a mountain of evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It should be plain as day.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But it isn't.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It isn't even close.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">When believers proffer their supposed <a href="http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html">evidence</a> it basically boils down to an illogical load of special pleading and arguments from ignorance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Because they have no real evidence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Certainly n</span>othing that can withstand any degree of logical scrutiny.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Indeed, I have already shown their strongest evidence of all - God's appearance in tortillas around the world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While it appears God is much too busy to bother answering prayers or smite his enemies or bestow knowledge upon us lowly sinners, He is apparently never too busy for Mexican food.</span></div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-50258689822153047642011-01-07T10:29:00.000-08:002011-01-07T10:29:54.896-08:00Do Theists Have Any Idea How Many Freebies We Give Them?We are constantly accused of being angry and militant and mean and harsh and all manner of nastiness. But looking at our debates, looking at the methods we employ to argue with theists, looking at the ground we regularly concede to even engage with theists, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that if anything we are too generous to theists.<br />
<br />
Do theists have any idea how many freebies we give them? How many assumptions we grant them? How far we go in assuming their points arguendo? Do they realize how nice we are being?<br />
<br />
We regularly grant them the assumption that some manner of god exists and then proceed to dismantle theism from there.<br />
<br />
We regularly grant them the assumption that their specific god exists and then proceed to dismantle theism from there.<br />
<br />
We regularly grant them the assumption that their preferred sacred text is true and then dismantle its internal structure, logical consistency and factual accuracy from there.<br />
<br />
We grant theists every possible courtesy and every possible point of argumentation and still have no trouble dismantling their theology and somehow WE are the assholes? Damn logic and those pesky facts and their atheistic bias.<br />
<br />
One would think that theists would recognize this generosity, would recognize our charity in going along with their assumptions for the sake of argument and would occasionally reciprocate.<br />
<br />
But there is no reciprocity. Ever. In fact, unless we tacitly accept many of their assumptions at the outset, many theists simply will not or can not engage at all.<br />
<br />
Perhaps there is simply no way around this. Perhaps this is because as soon as theists allow themselves to make atheist assumptions, the shield of faith and the sword of the spirit are no longer viable defense mechanisms and they find themselves utterly defenseless.<br />
<br />
Do we make these assumptions because as soon as they start making our assumptions we win?Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-59180940486676500072011-01-06T14:47:00.000-08:002011-01-07T09:08:15.364-08:00Cutting The Universe Down To Size<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore/PhysicalScience/atom-with-electrons.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore/PhysicalScience/atom-with-electrons.gif" width="320" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">One of the fundamental assumptions of every theistic worldview is the assumption that God is aware of and cares for the human species, human civilization, human morality, ethics, behavior, etc. Obviously, if God was not aware of or was uninterested in our affairs, it would not have taken the time to regale our ancestors with stories, perform miracles, answer prayers or otherwise intervene in our affairs, let alone sacrifice itself to atone for our allegedly naughty behavior.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The obvious corollary to this assumption is the notion that our species and our planet is somehow important. That we are relevant. That we matter.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">This assumption falls to pieces when we consider the true size and scope of the Universe and consider our place within it.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Imagine that the entirety of the observable Universe, every planet, every star, every black hole, every galaxy, every gas cloud, everything that humanity has ever or will ever see, were reduced to the size of a 1,000 square foot apartment. Your apartment. You own it. You built it. You furnished it. You are far and away the most intelligent, powerful and capable being in that Universe. For all intents and purposes, you would be God. Congratulations, you are God of your apartment.<br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Now imagine that our galaxy, the Milky Way, is somewhere in that Universe. What kind of object do you suppose would be roughly the same size? Posing this question to theists generates a wide array of answers. Some assume that our galaxy would be the size of the couch. Others guess the size of a television. Others guess something the size of a lamp. None have guessed anything smaller than a coaster.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">None of them are even close to the reality.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><a name='more'></a><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Our Universe has a radius of some 46 billion light years (ly) while our Galaxy has a radius of approximately 50,000 ly and our solar system has a radius of approximately 0.00001581 ly. Using some high school geometry we can determine the volume of those relative objects and then scale them down to approximate their size if the Universe were crammed down to fit in a 1,000 square foot apartment. Having no wish to bore anyone with the math, I have placed the numbers at the bottom, but the result is this:</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">If the Universe were crammed down to fit in a 1,000 square foot apartment, every single cubic inch would occupy a region of space equivalent to 2,359,489,230,131,172,839,506,172 ly^3. Our galaxy, in comparison occupies a measly 523,598,333,333,333 ly^3. Meaning our galaxy is MUCH smaller than a cubic inch. Indeed, our galaxy is much smaller than a cubic millimeter. To measure the size of our galaxy, we need to go much smaller, down to the kind of measurements we use to measure wavelengths of light and make circuit boards. We need to use microns.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">It turns out that if the volume of the Universe were equivalent to a 1,000 square foot apartment the ENTIRE Milky Way Galaxy would occupy a region of space roughly equivalent to a sphere with a radius of approximately 9.5 μm. This would constitute an object about two and a half times the size of a single red blood cell. Our solar system would comprise an object far, far, far smaller. Something on the order of a sphere with a radius slightly over 10 picometers. For comparison, the smallest atom (helium) has a radius of about 31 picometers.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">So if our Universe were crammed down to fit in the size of my apartment, our galaxy would be an object roughly the size of a single cell, and our solar system would be an object somewhere in that apartment that is smaller than an atom.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Now ask yourself, how much do you care about the individual atoms in your home? Do you worry about their well being? Do you consider their fates? Do you ponder their moral failings? Do you intervene in their affairs? Do you crave their worship? Do you bestow your wisdom upon them? Do you desire a personal relationship with them? Would you sacrifice yourself for them? Of course not. Because such trifling, insignificant things simply do not matter to you. They are irrelevant. Meaningless. Our entire galaxy would be reduced to the kind of thing that I breathe in and out every day without the slightest awareness. The kind of thing my white blood cells attack and destroy without the slightest hesitation. And our humble star? Our humble star would only even be detectable with the largest particle accelerators ever built.</div><br />
You occupy a level of existence, and possess a level of power and intelligence so far beyond that which exists on an atomic level that to even consider the 'feelings' or 'thoughts' or existence of an individual atom is ludicrous. 200,000,000,000,000 atoms would fit in the period at the end of this sentence. Is it really reasonable to believe or expect that you would even be aware of, let alone care, about such things? Of course not. Such things are simply beneath you.<br />
<br />
So it would be with God.<br />
<br />
Assuming that there is a God who created the Big Bang, that being would dwell on a level of existence so far beyond our own that our entire existence and that of every other object in our entire galaxy would be rendered totally irrelevant. Our galaxy would not be the equivalent of the television set or the couch or the refrigerator, our entire galaxy would be far less than a single speck of dust. Our galaxy would be a particle of grime on the toilet or in the carpet or on God's glasses? Or a speck inhaled and promptly destroyed by the divine equivalent of white blood cells. And our humble star? Infinitely less.<br />
<br />
Quite simply we do not represent the kind of beings which an entity on that plane of existence would have any interest. Certainly not the kind that would spark a desire for a personal relationship. To expect that the Creator of the Entire Universe, Sovereign over countless septillions of stars is going to cultivate a deep personal relationship and would willingly endure pain and sacrifice for inconsequential creatures trapped on the cosmic equivalent of an atom is perhaps the most insulting and degradingly arrogant belief imaginable. It does violence to the very idea of divinity.<br />
<br />
Theists always protest that it is impossible to know the mind of God, that certainly God is greater than we could imagine and that he COULD desire a relationship with beings such as us. But is such a belief reasonable? Is it probable? We are, afterall, allegedly created in God's image. If WE have absolutely ZERO interest in cultivating deep personal relationships with bacteria, why would we expect God to have any interest in us when comparatively speaking, our entire planet is far less than the divine equivalent of bacteria?<br />
<br />
Is it not far more likely that these assumptions are merely the wishful myths of ancient people with no understanding or knowledge of the wider world rather than a statement of how the Universe actually operates?<br />
<br />
MATH<br />
<br />
Volume of Sphere 4/3<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">π*r^3</span><br />
<br />
Radius of Universe <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>46,000,000,000 LY<br />
Volume of Universe <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>407,719,738,966,666,666,666,666,666,666,666 Cubic LY<br />
Radius of Milky Way Galaxy <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>50,000 LY<br />
Volume of Milky Way Galaxy <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>523,598,333,333,333 Cubic LY<br />
Radius of Solar System <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>0.00001581 LY<br />
Volume of Solar System <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>0.0000662247172 Cubic LY<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Volume of 1000 Square Foot Apartment as Universe = 10,000 Cubic Ft</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Cramming the approximate volume of the Universe into those 10,000 Cubic Feet yields the following results. While not perfect, it provides a good illustration.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Foot (ULY/10,000) <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>4,077,197,389,666,666,666,666,666,666 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Inch (/[12*12*12]) <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>2,359,489,230,131,172,839,506,172 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Milimeter (/[25.4*25.4*25.4]) (mm^3) <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>143,984,966,534,476,799,064 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Micrometer (/[1000*1000*1000]) (μm^3) <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>143,984,966,534 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Nanometer (/[1000*1000*1000]) (µµ^3<strong>) </strong><span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>143.984966 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each Cubic Picometer (/[1000*1000*1000]) (pm^3) <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ </span>0.0000000143984 Cubic LY</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Galaxy</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">523,598,333,333,333 ly^3 / 143,984,966,534 ly^3 = 3636.479 μm^3 <span style="font-family: inherit;">Solve for r. R <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ 9.5 <span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">μm</span>.</span></span></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Solar System <span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">0.0000662247172 </span>ly^3 / <span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">0.0000000143984 </span>ly^3 = 4599.449 <span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">pm^3 Solve for r. R <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">≈ 10.5 pm.</span></span></span></span></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-7329292888056304242011-01-05T13:14:00.000-08:002011-01-05T13:31:20.526-08:00Religion vs. Conspiracy Theory<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img height="200" src="http://fkpolitics.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/conspiracytheories.jpg" width="194" /></div><br />
What is the difference between religion and a conspiracy theory? Let's find out!<br />
<br />
Does the belief system attribute historical events to the machinations of a mastermind with seemingly limitless power, cunning and ability?<br />
<br />
Does the belief system exhibit a chronic lack of conclusive or dispositive evidence?<br />
<br />
Does the belief system explain away contradictory evidence by claiming that the contradictory evidence was planted by the mastermind to mislead or fabricated by enemies of the belief system?<br />
<br />
Does the belief system exhibit disdain for rational criticism?<br />
<br />
Is the belief system non-falsifiable?<br />
<br />
Is there any evidence of lack thereof that could alter belief in the machinations of the mastermind?<br />
<br />
Does the belief system offer a more complicated and evidence free explanation of a process or event that can be explained with the use of logic and evidence?<br />
<br />
Does the belief system regularly utilize special pleading, appeals to authority, bare assertions, arguments from ignorance, argumentum ad populum and other logical fallacies to support its arguments?<br />
<br />
Do critics of the belief system describe it as outlandish, ridiculous and irrational?<br />
<br />
Actually... Now that I look at it, the two are indistinguishable. Never mind, move along.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-19497708355265795872011-01-04T09:42:00.000-08:002011-01-04T09:44:21.096-08:00It is so Good to be Godless<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img height="213" src="http://photos.somd.com/data/500/medium/sunrise_at_sea.jpg" width="320" /></div><br />
It is the start of a new year and once again I am glad to be godless.<br />
<br />
When theists rail against atheism, they often speak in apocalyptic terms, as if we represent some kind of shambling zombie horde, just itching to burn churches, put believers in camps, devour brains, and of course, eat babies. It is almost as if they actually believe that atheism somehow strips the world of beauty, of meaning, of purpose, of wonderment. To that, I can only shake my head.<br />
<br />
It is <em>good</em> to be godless.<br />
<br />
Far from stripping the world of wonderment, I have found the world and our Universe to be a far more magnificent, magical, awe inspiring place once I let go of the illusion of god.<br />
<br />
I am humbled in the face of the Universe. I feel reverence and awe when I look up at the cosmos. I feel inspired by the magnificent and abundant beauty that has arisen all around us. And that feeling of reverence is only compounded by the realization that there is no plan, no design, no authorship. Those moments of randomness where a chance glance outward captures the rays of the setting sun perfectly echoed in the clouds. Or a single wind warped tree clinging to the side of a cliff.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
These are not moments created by any authorship - indeed, authorship would strip them of their grace and beauty in the same way that stacking the deck to ensure a royal flush would strip away the excitement of honestly receiving it. It is the very unlikelihood and randomness of existence that makes it so powerful and beautiful. And it is our ability to actually appreciate the wonder and grace and elegance and beauty of existence that sets our species apart. Our ability to be moved by beauty. Our ability to find meaning and power and inspiration in the world around us.<br />
<br />
We do not need god to be moved. We do not need god to be inspired. We do not need god to feel reverence and awe. This world in all of its magnificent, jaw dropping beauty is more than enough all on its own. We are privileged to bear witness to the culmination and combination of countless billions of changes in billions of species over billions of years coupled with the magnificent evolution of the geophysical world wrought by erosion, plate tectonics, hydrology, gravity and time.<br />
<br />
This beauty is rare, fleeting, improbable. We are privileged to experience a world in full bloom. To simply attribute such awesome beauty to some supra-entity is to miss out on one of the most vital and profound experiences of all - the rarity and preciousness of existence. To attribute such beauty to god is to cheat onesself out of the truly amazing and profound power of life.<br />
<br />
As late and wonderful Douglas Adams once wrote, "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"<br />
<br />
It's 2011 and I'm glad to be godless.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-18183216133379753832011-01-03T12:45:00.000-08:002011-01-03T13:15:00.755-08:00The Intolerable Arrogance of Theistic Worldviews<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img height="400" src="http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Science/Images/milky-way-galaxy.jpg" style="-ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor;" width="265" /></div><br />
Almost nothing illustrates the psychological phenomenon known as projection more vividly that the ubiquitous theistic pronouncement that atheists are arrogant.<br />
<br />
In theory, atheists are arrogant because they have the temerity to suggest that revealed knowledge is less reliable than knowledge earned through observation, calculation, measurement and experimentation. The temerity to suggest that perhaps ancient collections of mythology and folklore may not be the most efficacious method by which to seek understanding about the Universe, the origins of life and the human condition.<br />
<br />
In practice, however, theists proclaim that atheists are arrogant to conceal the mind blowing narcissism, arrogance, egocentrism and maddening anthropocentrism that lies at the heart of their cherished mythology. Theists proclaim the arrogance of atheists not because of the substance of our arguments, but because of the <a href="http://www.alternet.org/belief/149224/why_religious_people_are_scared_of_atheists/null">simple fact of our existence</a>, because ad homenim attacks are the only way they can deal with the fact that the entire Universe makes a mockery of their own arrogant certitude. It is projection made manifest.<br />
<br />
To illustrate, let's examine a few comparative statements of belief and see which exhibits greater arrogance.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God Exists.<br />
Atheist - I do not believe that God exists but do not believe that it can be definitively proven either way.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Theist - I KNOW God is aware of our existence and that we are important to Him.<br />
Atheist - Even assuming there is a God, I see no evidence that it is aware of our existence or deems us to be important or interesting in any way. Given the size and scope of the Universe I doubt that such an entity would be the slightest bit interested in creatures as finite and cosmically insignificant as we are.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God has appeared to humans.<br />
Atheist - As there is no evidence for such an occurrence I doubt such an appearance ever occurred.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God revealed knowledge to us and that the Bible/Quran/Book of Mormon/Dianetics etc. is true.<br />
Atheist - There have been somewhere on the order of 2780 different deities throughout recorded human history, nearly all of which had manuals of some sort, nearly all of which are expressly mutually exclusive and nearly all of which are internally inconsistent and contradictory. I see no reason whatsoever to engage in revelatory preference and choose one internally inconsistent mythology over another.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God's personality.<br />
Atheist - Assuming the existence of God, I would not be presumptuous enough to claim to know or understand anything about its goals, desires, motivations or otherwise, let alone claim to know that humans are somehow relevant to said motivations or are privy them.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God desires a personal relationship with me.<br />
Atheist - Assuming the existence of God, I see no evidence whatsoever that such a being would be the slightest bit interested in our entire galaxy, let alone our humble star or our infinitesimally tiny planet, let alone that such a being would desire a personal relationship with an individual denizen of such a world. To make such a claim is the equivalent of a subatomic particle claiming that I desire a personal desire with it.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW God answers my prayers.<br />
Atheist - I see no evidence whatsoever that God answers prayers any more than a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk6ILZAaAMI">milk jug</a> answers prayers.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW all other God Beliefs are False.<br />
Atheist - I believe that the supernatural claims and hypotheses offered by <em>every</em> religion can be readily explained through rational means that do not require the invocation of any divinity or can be dismissed due to conflicting, contradictory or simply non-existent evidence. As these supernatural claims go wholly unsupported when subjected to rational inquiry, I believe that all such supernatural claims are false regardless of which religion posits them.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW that when my Faith is contradicted, my Faith is correct regardless of any evidence to the contrary.<br />
Atheist - Expressions of belief in an unrealized proposition despite evidence that said proposition is false is illogical and irrational.<br />
<br />
Theist - I KNOW atheists are arrogant.<br />
Atheist - Theists who claim not only to KNOW that God exists, but claim to KNOW his mind, his character, his desires, who claim that humanity is somehow special and privileged in a Universe filled with hundreds of billions of galaxies and hundreds of sextillions of stars, and septillions of planets, that such a being has chosen to have a personal relationship with them as individuals and that their chosen deity will punish those who disagree with them and their chosen mythological book for all eternity think <em>we're</em> arrogant? That's rich.<br />
<br />
Sorry theists, but most of our lives aren't even interesting enough to justify an hour of reality television a week. The idea that the Creator of the Entire Freaking Universe, Sovereign over hundreds of billions of galaxies, sextillions of stars and septillions of planets is fascinated by the mundane trivialities of our lives - THAT is the epitome of narcissism and egotism. It is arrogance that borders on madness. You proclaim us arrogant to disguise your own.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-36968435081378027712010-12-31T11:30:00.000-08:002010-12-31T17:45:12.043-08:00Dumb Theistic Argument of the Week<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://www.lostrepublic.us/Graphics/DoubleFacePalm.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="double face palm" border="0" height="256" src="http://www.lostrepublic.us/Graphics/DoubleFacePalm.jpg" width="320" /></a>In response to my contention that the law Yahweh provided was ludicrously inadequate and was in fact highly immoral, Anonymous responded thus:</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">"God provides laws regulating everything when no laws existed, do you get the point? No laws were there which could say that one action was better than another. Making laws established parity for the behavior of the people he was going to send many more prophets to. This is an example of God teaching men proper behavior piece by piece, not suggesting slavery is not objectively immoral, but that humanity had to be brought to a point where they could accept and live with the knowledge that it was so."</div><br />
This statement is mind bogglingly ignorant and counterfactual on almost every single level.<br />
<br />
1. "God provides laws regulating everything when no laws existed, do you get the point?" Apparently I don't get the point... As a threshold matter, let's dispense with the ludicrous contention that no laws existed. The Mosaic Law was developed somewhere between 700 and 800 BCE. In contrast, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Ur-Nammu">Code of Ur-Nammu</a> was codified somewhere around 2050 BCE, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Eshnunna">Laws of Eshunna</a> somewhere around 1930 BCE, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipit-Ishtar">Codex of Lipit Ishtar</a> somewhere around 1870 BCE, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_hammurabi">Code of Hammurabi</a> somewhere around 1750 BCE. This does not even include other codes of laws extant in the Far East. In other words, far from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuteronomist">Mosaic Law</a> simply coming into being 'when no laws existed,' the Mosaic Law was actually merely a restatement of codified legal codes that had been in existence throughout the Middle East for over a thousand years. Indeed, much of Mosaic Law was copied directly from the Code of Hammurabi.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
2. "No laws were there which could say that one action was better than another." Aside from being factually incorrect (see above), this statement makes the specious assumption that morality and the knowledge of right and wrong can be established only through some manner of authority engaging in the labelling process. This directly contradicts the Bible in the sense that in the story of Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve KNEW the difference between good and evil as soon as they ate from the tree of knowledge. This is also a rather strange sentiment given the fact that Yahweh was so pissed off at the alleged wickedness of humanity that he decided to wipe all of them out with the flood. How could Yahweh justify this course of action if, as this theist posits, there were no laws 'which could say that one action was better than another.' This is either a tacit admission that there WERE laws by which one could determine that one action was better than another, or that Yahweh is a psychotic monster who wantonly slaughtered the entire population of Earth because he forgot or didn't bother to tell people that one action was better than another. Of course, setting the Bible aside, it is obvious that morality can and does exist in the absence of or even contrary to written law.<br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">3. "Making laws established parity for the behavior of the people he was going to send many more prophets to." This proposition is nonsense. It wrongly assumes that the people Yahweh was sending prophets to did not have extant laws. Of course, they DID, have codes of laws, many of which were hundreds if not thousands of years older than the Mosaic Law. More importantly, this notion of 'parity for the behavior of the people' is curious since the Mosaic Law was largely copied from the extant legal codes of neighboring countries - if anything the Mosaic Law merely brings the Hebrew legal code into line with preexisting legal codes.</div><br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">4. "This is an example of God teaching men proper behavior piece by piece, not suggesting slavery is not objectively immoral, but that humanity had to be brought to a point where they could accept and live with the knowledge that it was so." This is simply false. This is a complete and utter cop out - an unsuccessful attempt to dodge the stark reality that Yahweh absolutely DID expressly permit and codify slavery. Nothing in either the OT or the NT even HINTS at the notion that slavery is objectively immoral. The idea that Yahweh or Jesus at any point indicated to humanity that slavery was objectively immoral is utterly unsupported by the text of the Bible which takes great pains to codify and establish the institution of slavery and provide safe harbor laws for beating slaves. The Bible expressly states that you can beat your slave so severely that he dies, but as long as he dies the next day, it's okay. The notion that slavery is objectively immoral does NOT come from any kind of divine revelation, but is a wholly secular development.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">More importantly, HE'S YAHWEH! If he KNOWS that slavery is objectively immoral, wouldn't it behoove Him to let us know that he doesn't support the practice? Given this theist's contention that the law was necessary to know which actions are good and which are evil, Yahweh's failure to address this rather glaring example of objective immorality seems highly irresponsible, especially given the Hebrew's allegedly recent experience with slavery. Honestly, could there have been a BETTER time to mention that God is opposed to slavery than right after he invested so much spiritual capital in delivering his people from its supposed evils?</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The simple fact is that Yahweh did NOT teach men proper behavior. The Mosaic Law spends a ridiculous amount of time on completely irrelevant ephemera (Leviticus) and utterly ignores or expressly advocates any number of behaviors we now deem objectively evil. Slavery, Genocide, Rape, Stoning, Mutilation, etcetera. Men merely codified what they presently believed to be a proper code of social conduct based on extant laws and social norms then slapped on a patina of divinity to provide an aura of authority.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><Facepalm></div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-66993109601979431892010-12-30T13:05:00.000-08:002010-12-30T14:08:44.400-08:00Can We Please Stop Talking About Atheists' Tone?<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img height="217" src="http://www.lifehack.org/wp-content/files/2008/07/argument-380x258.jpg" width="320" /></div>Our tone does not matter.<br />
<br />
Our tone is not the issue.<br />
<br />
Our tone is irrelevant.<br />
<br />
Our tone is nothing but a meaningless distraction, a red herring, a means of dodging the simple fact that when theists engage in substantive discussions they lose.<br />
<br />
Theists lose on the facts. And they know it.<br />
<br />
When we talk about cosmology, they dither and quibble and retreat to furious hand wringing and meaningless talking points about vague unknown and unknowable first causes. When we talk about biology, they pull the same trick, repeatedly returning to the God of the Gaps. When we talk about morality, they mumble about Hitler, Stalin and Mao, completely ignoring the fact that their alleged atheism had about as much to do with their megalomania as the presence of a Y Chromosome while denying all responsibility for the countless horrors perpetrated in the name of religion and glossing over the fact that incredibly secular countries are deeply stable and are actually living the moral life theists like to preach about.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
When presented with facts and evidence, theists retreat to faith. And they're losing.<br />
<br />
This is why rather than dealing with the substantive arguments against theism, theists spend so much time whimpering about our tone and whining about how mean and militant and aggressive and harsh atheists are when dealing with theists. Pot, meet kettle.<br />
<br />
They complain about our tone <em>because</em> they are losing.<br />
<br />
When theists attack atheists because of their tone it is nothing more than a petulant demand that we cease offering evidence that their worldview is based on shoddy reasoning and poor logic.<br />
<br />
Because the reality is that our tone is NOT the problem. Our tone doesn't matter. Because it doesn't matter how polite we are, how eloquent we are, how articulate or respectful we are. It is not our tone that theists reject - it is our existence.<br />
<br />
What is truly ironic is that it is <em>theists</em> who complain about the aggressiveness, combativeness and militancy of atheists. Atheists regularly receive death threats. We are regularly told that we are damned, that we are going to hell, that we are a plague, a disease, an abomination. And yet somehow it is atheists who are aggressive and militant... We need to stop lending credence to this meme.<br />
<br />
Are some atheists arrogant? Absolutely. Can some atheists be condescending? Oh my yes. Can some atheists be overbearing and rude? Hell yeah. Do some atheists denigrate the intelligence of believers? They sure do.<br />
<br />
But does anything we do compare in any way to the hateful, bigotry theists direct towards us? Do atheists send believers death threats? Do we pound on the doors of believers demanding that they deconvert? Do we threaten believers with damnation or eternal torture? Nope.<br />
<br />
The simple truth is that there is nothing that atheists can do or say that will prevent theists from attacking us about our tone. They attack our tone because it is the only issue where theists can still win. Moreover, it plays into the overwhelming sense of Christian entitlement and privilege <em>and</em> allows them to feel persecuted and victimized without the unpleasantness of actually being persecuted and victimized.<br />
<br />
Our tone is NOT the problem.<br />
<br />
Which is why I wish we would stop talking about it. Which is why I wish we as a community would stop bashing each other simply because others express themselves differently than we would. Which is why I propose that for the first two weeks of 2011, that atheists refrain from complaining about other atheists' tone. It does us no good and it legitimizes and perpetuates the only real argument theists have left.<br />
<br />
Because no matter how much you may disagree with an individual atheists' tone, it is nowhere near as despicably arrogant, condescending and insulting as the tone theists routinely hurl our way. When the Vicar of Christ <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312531/POPES-UK-VISIT-Benedict-XVI-likens-rise-atheism-Nazis.html">declares that atheists are Nazis</a>, there can be nothing more arrogant and condescending than the theistic insistence that they KNOW the truth despite voluminous evidence to the contrary. Their absolute and utterly unjustified certainty perfectly illustrates the truth - that it is not the tenor of our words but the content of our minds that theists truly fear.<br />
<br />
The endless whimpering and whining about our tone is nothing but a distraction from the fact that theists are losing the debate. On every substantive issue and by every conceivable metric, theists are losing.<br />
<br />
So let's stop bitching about one another's tone - just for a little while - and focus on the fact that it ISN'T our words that infuriates and enrages theists, it's our ideas. And let's celebrate the fact that regardless of how we express those ideas, we are winning.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-30942381206736914442010-12-29T10:00:00.000-08:002010-12-29T10:10:43.139-08:00Society Just Doesn't Need Religion to be Moral<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://www.turnbacktogod.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/the-ten-commandments-1956-movie-04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.turnbacktogod.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/the-ten-commandments-1956-movie-04.jpg" width="222" /></a>One of the most common complaints theists make regarding atheism is the alleged amorality of atheists. This mirrors the common misconception that atheism is either equivalent to or at least a kissing cousin of nihilism. Nothing could be further from the truth. The genesis of this allegation is the notion that human morality is dependent upon the existence of and adherence to a system of morality mandated by the divine. The obvious utility of this allegation is that it means that religion, all religion, is necessary to prevent humanity from descending into the Hobbesian nightmare of the eternal war of all against all.</div></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">But is it obvious that human morality can exist only within the confines of an externally mandated system of divine rewards and punishments? Is a divine code of conduct necessary for human morality? This canards is not only patently ridiculous, but demonstrably against the weight of the evidence of the entirety of human history.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">As a threshold matter, the idea that human morality is dependent upon a divine code of conduct depends first and foremost upon agreement as to the basic tenets of what that code of conduct IS. It should first be noted that over the course of human civilization innumerable human religions that have waxed and waned. More importantly, those innumerable faiths <b>do not</b> possess any overall consensus as to what code of morality the divine actually intends for us to follow. Indeed, nearly all express not only skepticism regarding the morality of other faiths, but outright condemn those who practice them. Given that supposed moral exclusivity, one would assume that <i>within</i> a given religion, at least, that code of morality would be as unchanging as the eternal divinity it purportedly represents. Even within a single religion, however, that code of conduct, that supposedly unchanging moral code has shifted over the millennia.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">To be blunt, the written code of conduct and ethics that dominated each of the Abrahamaic religions is incredibly barbaric. <br />
<a name='more'></a>Chattel slavery was expressly permitted. Women were expressly relegated to second class citizens. Sex outside of marriage and was considered a sin so vile that adultery, let alone any whiff of homosexuality was to be punished by death. God not only authorized, but <i>expressly</i> commanded genocide. The list of barbaric conduct not only permitted, but <i>demanded</i> by the gods of the Abrahamaic religions is too extensive to list. Suffice it to say, however, that adherence to such a code would make God a war criminal if he were human.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Even more troubling, the Abrahamiaic religions were obsessed with what we would probably call 'thought crimes' today. Envy, covetousness, lust, etc. Simple human emotions were themselves branded as sinful.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Obviously, the draconian code of conduct demanded in ancient stone tablets, scrolls and parchment, and its demand for the death penalty for ridiculously minor offenses, is somewhat difficult to put into practice. So over the centuries, religion gradually filed off some of the harsher edges. Such softening was utterly necessary if only to ensure that they didn't execute half of their citizenry for having sex and the other half for thinking about it. As the centuries progressed, humans recognized that chattel slavery, DESPITE its Biblical stamp of approval, was itself a moral evil, and that freedom in and of itself is a moral good.<br />
<br />
This revelation is rather striking in that one would assume that an all knowing, all powerful super-deity would have been well aware that slavery was inherently evil LONG before humans figured that out on their own. One would assume, that had this being had any interest in our code of conduct reflecting its own, that it simply would have added another commandment stating “Thou Shalt Not Enslave Or Own Thy Brethren.” The ancient texts' treatment of women eventually suffered the same fate as that of slavery in that over the centuries, human beings came to understand that females were fully capable of being amazingly productive members of society and that, in fact, they were MORE productive when they were not subjugated to the patriarchal whims of their husbands. The same is presently occurring with regard to homosexuals and their inevitable recognition as full members of society and their entitlement to all of the legal and civil benefits afforded to heterosexuals.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">As further evidence of this softening, it is fascinating to understand that many of the heroes of the ancient religions would be considered war criminals in the modern world. Moses and the itinerant Hebrews launched waves of invasions and genocidal warfare against their neighbors and their God commanded the slaughter of the men, women and children of the cities they seized. Imagine the present day reaction to a stateless religious group of men and women who invaded neighboring countries, attacked and razed their cities and butchered their citizens. We would call such people war criminals. We would label them terrorists. Our leaders would declare that we want them 'Dead or Alive.' We would hunt such barbarian thugs to the very ends of the Earth and execute them for their crimes.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Theists will argue that the world was different then, that it is unfair to apply OUR morality to a different world, but is that not the very ESSENCE of moral relativism? Indeed, in defense of their founders, Theists MUST argue such things. Must argue that Abraham was on the side of light and was perfectly justified as he lifted the knife and prepared to murder his son. Must argue that Moses was on the side of justice as he and his followers butchered innocent men, women and children and plundered their cities. Else they must recognize that the moral code, the ethical code handed down to us by the Divine is fundamentally flawed and has required numerous revisions.</div></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">As an atheist I more than happy to accept our moral relativism. Moreover, I am endlessly encouraged by the fact that secular countries, far from slipping into some degenerate state of social, political and economic chaos, significantly outperform highly religious countries by almost any conceivable metric of social or political well being.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">As an atheist I am unfettered from ancient, archaic and barbaric traditions and codes of conduct, and am free to acknowledge the reality that morality is a social construct. A flexible, malleable and adaptable set of expectations whose reciprocal obligations are enforced through social dynamics such as shame, guilt and ostracism. As an atheist, I am delighted by the fact that morality evolves, that it can and will grow as we mature as a species. It evolves with us, because it IS us, it is our will, our desires, our conception of ourselves and how we should be.</div><br />
As an atheist, I am free to recognize that just as our societies, as our human civilization has grown more egalitarian, more fair, more just, that morality will adapt and evolve along with it - hopefully towards greater justice, greater freedom, greater liberty, and greater acceptance of others. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "The arc of the moral Universe is long, but it bends towards justice." May it ever be so.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-4498246346879174612010-12-28T10:03:00.000-08:002010-12-28T10:09:15.196-08:00Faith Is Incompatible With Humility And Intellectual Shame<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://www.jewishlordswitness.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/clouds_jesus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="255" src="http://www.jewishlordswitness.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/clouds_jesus.jpg" width="320" /></a>One of the most fascinating thing about debates with theists is the way in which every single argument, every single piece of contradictory evidence, every fact that illustrates the folly or impossibility of a specific belief can be blithely ignored without the slightest hint of humility or intellectual shame.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">No matter how well crafted the argument, no matter how sound the logic, no matter how compelling the evidence and no matter how reasonable the tone, Faith, as discussed <a href="http://meaningwithoutgodproject.blogspot.com/2010/10/faith-last-refuge-of-irrational.html">here</a>, is utterly impervious to reason. Faith cannot be reasoned with because Faith is fundamentally incompatible with reason.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>More troubling, Faith seems wholly incompatible with either humility or shame.<br />
<br />
Faith is the mechanism by which a believer can convince themselves that they are right no matter how manifestly and demonstrably wrong they actually are - no matter how ridiculous their belief. Faith is an intellectual temper tantrum, a purely emotional insistence that the believer is right no matter what - and no evidence to the contrary will ever be considered. Few human attributes demonstrate a more profound and overwhelming arrogance than Faith.<br />
<br />
The Faithful are incapable of shame. Normally, when human beings are presented with compelling evidence that their position is incorrect, there is a certain degree of intellectual shame accompanying that realization. The Faithful have no such problem, they simply deny the evidence or claim that the absence of evidence is merely proof that absolute knowledge is impossible.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><a name='more'></a><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Which is supposedly why Faith is necessary.</div><br />
And yet the Faithful profess to have precisely the absolute knowledge they claim is impossible. The Faithful claim to KNOW that God exists - a far stronger epistemological claim than almost any atheist I have ever met. Moreover, they claim to have specific knowledge about his personality, his plans, his state of mind, his purpose.<br />
<br />
The Faithful posit that revealed knowledge is in fact superior to observation, measurement, calculation and the accumulation of evidence. Indeed, so certain are the Faithful in the supposed superiority of revealed knowledge to empirical knowledge that they KNOW that any contradictory empirical knowledge MUST be wrong. Faith professes absolute certitude on the basis of subjective, internal feeling states, no matter what any objective empirical evidence shows. It is hard to imagine an attidude more shamefully and wrongfully arrogant than Faith.<br />
<br />
To the Faithful, seeing is less valuable than believing. Which begs the question - If God meant for us to rely solely on Faith, why would he create us with all of these senses that MUST be ignored if Faith is to survive.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-65311094349793009862010-12-27T09:54:00.000-08:002010-12-27T09:54:31.893-08:00Theists Like Their Gods SmallTheists <em>should</em> be overjoyed at the scientific advances of the last 500 years. They should be ecstatic at the wondrous ways in which science has enlarged the scope of our Universe, uncovered the marvelous complexity of the cosmos, revealed the mechanisms by which our atoms are forged, and detailed the fantastic intricacies of living organisms. Science has given us an amazing understanding of the physical, chemical, geological, and biological wonders that fill our Universe, understandings that dramatically increase the size, scale and beauty of our world and the Cosmos.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://homeboyastronomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/10-spiral-galaxy-m74-hubble.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="308" src="http://homeboyastronomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/10-spiral-galaxy-m74-hubble.jpg" width="320" /></a>Theists should be filled with awe at the vastness, scope, breadth and age of our Universe and the ways in which it vastly exceeds the wildest imaginings of our ancient ancestors. Theists should be in love with science for so dramatically increasing the awe inspiring size, scope and nature of the Universe over which their god is supposedly sovereign.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Instead, theists despise science. They despise what it has revealed about the size of the Universe, the age of the Universe, the age of our planet. They actively fight against the majesty and age of the Universe. The despise it because theists are desperate to keep god small, to keep god manageable. Theists are FAR more comfortable with a petty god, a small god, a parochial god because such a deity allows US to feel important. Special. Chosen.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>The ancients clearly believed that humans were special, were chosen. They believed this because they had no understanding of the size and scope of the tiny planet they inhabited, let alone the Universe they lived in. The ancients believed that Earth was the center of the Universe, that the sun orbited around it and that the stars were merely fixed scenery. In that kind of Universe, the preeminence of humanity was clear, uncontested. It was in that kind of Universe that the tiny gods of old were forged, gods who actively discriminated between groups and tribes based on petty liturgical or doctrinal distinctions. In that kind of Universe, god is merely a few existential steps above humanity, god of the solar system.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Their Universe was painfully small, and as a result, the gods man made were painfully small as well. They are petty, parochial, jealous entities. Interplanetary Santa Clauses handing out punishments to those who are 'naughty' and rewards to those who are 'nice.' Such a conception of divinity was appropriate when our conception of the Universe was a set of concentric spheres fixed about an unmoving Earth. Such a conception of divinity is wholly misplaced now that humanity has seen what it has seen and knows what it knows.<br />
<br />
Our Universe is incomprehensibly larger than the ancients ever dreamed of, so large that it makes the ancients' conceptions of god laughably quaint and ridiculously small. Theists should be elated that their god is now sovereign over something so much vaster than we ever could have imagined - yet it fills them with dread instead. Because in showing how vast the Universe truly is, in showing how life can form absent intervention, in unlocking the secrets of the origins of time, space, matter, atomic structures, science has shown how truly inconsequential humanity is, how irrelevant we are in any greater cosmic sense.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Scientific understanding of the size and scope of the Universe fills me with awe and joy, but it also makes me aware of my own insignificance. Of our species' ultimate irrelevance in any cosmic sense. It is this realization that theists cannot bear to contemplate. Theists have become comfortable with a tiny god. With a petty, shallow, small entity that only dwells a few levels of association above us. Such a conception fits their shallow notions of a father god, a personal god, a Loving, anthropomorphic god.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">While such conceptions certainly flatter the ego, such conceptions completely fall apart when we begin to realize that Earth is not only <em>not</em> the center of the Universe, but is not the center of our galaxy, nor even the center of our solar system, and that our entire solar system is but one of innumerable others. Theists hate science because it has revealed a Universe that is vast and beautiful beyond imagining in which we play virtually no role whatsoever. Theists cannot bear this truth because religion is fundamentally based on arrogance, narcissism and egocentrism and for such conceptions to remain, god and the Universe must remain small.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-80971455427226843952010-12-21T14:09:00.000-08:002010-12-21T14:48:14.409-08:00Why is Blasphemy the ONLY Unforgivable Sin?<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGX0nvMerAbhOUtP63_qyc1wMJL_MRJjTJL1hc3fV_L9iQLXbdMW0RhYfpAb0r6AjdGSWYd4pc9-oAhyphenhyphen_zbZZCbPSIyiKbmi0A_xT8GW5b_4Fo-vsqmGWMWVScNlRc2NsEAduRAJ6vcps/s1600/hell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" n4="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGX0nvMerAbhOUtP63_qyc1wMJL_MRJjTJL1hc3fV_L9iQLXbdMW0RhYfpAb0r6AjdGSWYd4pc9-oAhyphenhyphen_zbZZCbPSIyiKbmi0A_xT8GW5b_4Fo-vsqmGWMWVScNlRc2NsEAduRAJ6vcps/s320/hell.jpg" width="320" /></a>"Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter, <span class="woj">but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin." Mark 3:28-29</span></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>"And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. <span class="woj">Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." Matthew 12:30-32</span><br />
<br />
Of all the vile, despicable, wretched, evil acts that humankind can commit, murder, rape, torture, slavery, genocide, child abuse, why exactly is Blasphemy considered the ONLY unforgivable sin?<br />
<br />
Why exactly is it that out of all the horrible ACTIONS that humans can commit, only WORDS are considered unforgivable.<br />
<br />
Words.<br />
<br />
Is God really so thin skinned? So petty? So easily insulted? I seem to recall a phrase from my youth 'sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me.' Clearly this phrase does not apply to our allegedly all powerful Creator. Our thin skinned, whimpering, blubbering Creator is so deeply wounded that merely denying His existence or doubting the magics of his allegedly annointed one is the ONE unforgivable sin.<br />
<ul><li>Murder your fellow man? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Rape a woman? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Rape a child? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Torture a child? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Slaughter an entire people? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Enslave an entire populations? No problem. Just believe and you'll be forgiven.</li>
<li>Deny God's existence? Deny that Jesus' 'magics' were the work of the Holy Spirit? UNFORGIVABLE!!! YOU ARE DAMNED FOR ALL ETERNITY AND NO AMOUNT OF BELIEF OR PRAYER WILL SAVE YOU FROM GOD'S WRATH!!!</li>
</ul>Why exactly is blasphemy the ONE unforgivable sin? Easy.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Control.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Religion is and always has been about control. About subjugation. About dominance. Nothing is better at quashing dissent than claiming that the very act of dissent is a one way ticket to eternal torment and damnation. This doctrine cleverly nips dissent in the bud, because not only is dissent a sin, it is UNFORGIVABLE, which means merely dabbling in dissent, perhaps even thinking about it could unalterably destroy any chance you have at salvation.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>Christianity is and always has trafficked in fear. Blasphemy is the ONLY unforgivable sin because the one thing that Christianity itself has always feared is dissent.<br />
<br />
Update: I am well aware that it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, however, the three are one and the same. It's your trinitarian gobbledygook, not mine.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-29305709891445592382010-12-21T09:40:00.000-08:002010-12-21T10:45:34.546-08:00The Uselessness of PrayerWe are creatures who crave causation. We see an effect and we look for a cause. Unlike any other creature, our intelligence leads us to the inescapable conclusion that when something happens, something else must have caused it to happen. While this is one of the hallmarks of our intelligence, it often leads to erroneous conclusions, and gross misattributions especially when the effects which we are attempting to explain have multiple causes, or whose causes are not readily apparent. Nothing illustrates our tendency to misattribute cause than the belief in the efficacy of prayer.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; height: 167px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em; width: 217px;"><img height="150" src="http://www.beliefs-in-islam.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/islam-prayer.jpg" width="200" /></div></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">We crave causation because it provides us with the illusion that if we can control the cause, we can control the outcome. The idea of an interventionist deity is the ultimate expression of this primal craving for a knowable causation. Early humans had little to no understanding of the underlying mechanics of the world they inhabited. The idea that the landforms they walked were the result of complex geological and hydrological processes operating over billions of years would have been utterly unfathomable to an early human. The idea that the weather that battered or blessed their crops arose due to the complex interplay between those landforms and thermal, pressure and humidity gradients that are themselves driven by the sun's influence on atmospheric and oceanic conditions would have been incomprehensible. Early humans could see the effect of weather, could even track the budding symptoms of weather to come, but utterly lacked any knowledge of the cause.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Gods were a simple answer to an unimaginably complex set of questions. Why did the weather do what it did? Why does the sea do what it does? Because the gods are angry or benevolent or a million other human emotions. By assigning human emotions to the divine and by then assigning those emotions to some physical manifestation, that primordial craving for an underlying cause is satisfied. More importantly, if these physical manifestations can be explained by some divine emotional state, it places complex physical systems under human control, because if we could somehow alter the emotional state of the divine, placate it through prayer, meditation, sacrifice, or otherwise, we can ultimately exert control over our physical environment. And so throughout human history, men have prayed, meditated, pleaded and sacrificed in the hopes of exerting control over the physical world by appealing to the fickle emotions of a million different divinities.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a name='more'></a><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">When I was growing up, I was told that “God always answers prayers, its just that often the answer is 'No.' or 'Wait.'” Looking back, I cannot help but marvel at the amazing psychology behind such a sentiment.<br />
<br />
Even the strictest and most literal adherents to religious dogma cannot avoid the manifestly obvious truth that simply praying for something to occur in no way ensures that it will. Anyone who has ever prayed for anything must admit that at some point they have earnestly even desperately prayed for something that did not come to pass. Indeed, anyone who has ever prayed will probably be willing to admit that MANY of the things they pray for do not actually come to pass.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Prayer is ultimately a totemic, talismanic invocation no different than sacrificing a chicken or a goat, blowing on dice before a throw at craps or wearing a lucky jersey to a sporting event. Obviously, blowing on dice before a toss in no way guarantees a positive outcome. Indeed, the chances of obtaining the desired result is not in any way modified by our actions. Obviously sacrificing a chicken to Asherah or Baal or Zeus is not going to alter the weather to ensure that my crops will flourish. Obviously, wearing a lucky jersey, even a jersey that you have worn to many games, in no way guarantees that the outcome of the sporting event will be desirable. Indeed, it has no impact on the game whatsoever. Yet we continue to engage in such pointless activities because it is a means of satisfying our need for control. Humans pray because it satisfies a deep seated need to exercise some degree of control over the outcome of events.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The sentiment that God always <i>answers</i> prayers, even if that answer is WAIT or NO is merely a clever way of accounting for the fact that ultimately prayer has absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of any given event. It is an <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk6ILZAaAMI">illusion</a>. Many will vehemently disagree and cite anecdotal and personal stories wherein they were praying for some specific result and they obtained it. And there are, of course, studies that laud the psychological benefits of prayer. I do not doubt the veracity of such anecdotes and studies, but think that they again, fail to deal with the proper chain of causation and are ultimately a manifestation of gross causal misattribution.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Prayer is an utterly useless and meaningless activity insofar as it seeks to obtain some sort of divine intervention. However, Prayer, like meditation, <i>is</i> exceedingly useful in focusing the human mind. When we pray, when we focus our minds on a specific objective. We often obtain clarity of thought and clarity of action that we would otherwise lack, BECAUSE we are thinking about it, we are exerting our time and energy in a problem solving endeavor. That allows us to take more productive and effective steps towards achieving our goal and increasing our chances of attaining it. To be sure, under such circumstances, prayer is an effective tool for achieving a certain end, but make no mistake, such prayers are <em>not</em> effective because some invisible sky wizard has listened to your pleas and decided to intercede on your behalf. That is a fallacy of misattribution.<br />
<br />
When prayer is effective it is effective because you have taken productive steps to better your circumstances. You have concentrated. You have focused. You have exerted the energy necessary to consider whatever problem you are facing and confront it with greater clarity or knowledge than you would have otherwise possessed. What your prayers have done is changed YOU, not facilitated the intervention of some higher being.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">I will never understand the religious obsession with the power of prayer. Prayer is at best a crap shoot. It is a complete and utter failure at least as often as it allegedly succeeds. I never pray. Ever. Yet shockingly, things that I want to happen, specifically, those things that I work hard for, happen with far greater frequency than those things where I simply wish and hope for a positive outcome. The simple truth is that God, even assuming He exists, does not answer prayer.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Put yourself in God's shoes for a moment. Ask yourself if you would answer the prayers of a single bacteria on the other side of the world. Would you? Would you even be aware of its existence? Would you care about its plight? Would you care about its earnest pleas for help? Or would you ignore this utterly inconsequential creature because you have more important things to do? The simple truth is that we are even less to the Creator of the Universe than a bacteria is to us and our pleas, no matter how earnest, no matter how heartfelt, are simply beneath the notice of such a being.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Indeed, to presume that such a being would actually take the time and make the effort to deal with our utterly mundane and cosmically meaningless problems is an ideology of breathtaking arrogance and surpassing narcissism. Indeed, so petty and small are our trivial concerns that they scarcely register in the life cycle of this planet, let alone in any wider cosmic sense. To presume that such a being, who has presumably existed for tens of billions of years and will presumably exercise sovereignty for countless trillions of years beyond, would be the slightest bit concerned or the slightest bit interested in the transitory, ephemeral concerns that plague our comically brief existence is utterly laughable. To presume that such a being would actually take the time to intervene in the affairs of the world and answer the petty incantations of our trivial species borders on insanity. To believe that such a being would lower itself to act as our cosmic servant, endlessly answering our pointless, self-centered, prayers and catering to our endless, contradictory whims is insultingly silly and denigrating to such a being.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is no one intervening on our behalf. No invisible men or women flitting through the ether and making sure that all our dreams come true. But take heart, because the fact that God doesn't answer <i>your</i> prayers could not be less important. God doesn't answer <i>any</i> prayers. He never has. He never will.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Take heart, because neither you, nor we as a species are powerless. God doesn't answer prayers, but <i>humans</i> do. <i>Humans</i> answer prayers all the time. Normally, all we need do is ask. When we need help, when we ask, and we receive some unexpected kindness or aid, or comfort, or love, it is not God answering our supplications, but our brothers and sisters. Our kin. Our kind.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-6644363660999280232010-12-20T10:41:00.000-08:002010-12-20T10:44:49.148-08:00The Hubble Telescope - Atheism's Greatest Weapon<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; height: 384px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; width: 405px;"><img height="380" src="http://www.spacetelescope.org/static/archives/images/screen/opo0428b.jpg" style="-ms-interpolation-mode: nearest-neighbor;" width="400" /></div><br />
If Dinosaurs are atheism's <a href="http://meaningwithoutgodproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/dinosaurs-atheisms-gateway-drug.html">gateway drug</a>, then Astronomy is almost certainly atheism's crack cocaine.<br />
<br />
While Dinosaurs let me in on the secret that the Bible could be wrong, Astronomy convinced me that God almost certainly didn't exist.<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Dinosaurs showed me how incredibly old and unbelievably ancient our world was. Astronomy showed me how unfathomably small and utterly insignificant we are in the cosmos.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The image to the right - the Hubble Ultra Deep Field - is an image of a patch of the night sky the size of a grain of sand held out at arms length that appears to be completely empty. In that almost microscopic patch of sky, Hubble was able to capture images of thousands of galaxies.</div><a name='more'></a><br />
Thousands of <em>galaxies</em> in a seemingly empty patch of sky no larger than a grain of sand. Pictures of galaxies as they existed almost 13,000,000,000 years ago. Pictures of events that took place before our star or our planet had even formed. Pictures from near the birth of our Universe.<br />
<br />
The images sent back by Hubble place our existence in perspective like nothing the ancients could ever have imagined. The ancients who wrote the Torah, the Talmud, the Bible, the Quran had no understanding of what they were looking at. They had no idea of the size or scope or scale of even our planet, let alone the Universe - so they can be forgiven for believing that we are somehow privileged, somehow special, somehow important. Their narcissistic and egotistical assumption that the Creator of the Universe is interested in us might make sense in a world where it was believed that the Earth was the center of the Universe, that the sun and planets orbited it, and the stars were simply a sparkly sphere surrounding it.<br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2010/04/hey_hubble_thanks_for_20_years/384605main_ero_omega_centauri_full_full.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2010/04/hey_hubble_thanks_for_20_years/384605main_ero_omega_centauri_full_full.jpeg" width="268" /></a>But we know better. And that knowledge renders the ancients' concepts of divinity ludicrously small. That knowledge renders the idea of an interventionist deity pathetically parochial.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">When we look up at the entire night sky, our eyes can see about 3,000 stars. When Hubble stares at a tiny, insignificant and empty patch of sky, it can see over 10,000 galaxies.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Each of these galaxies contains hundreds of billions of stars like those captured by Hubble in the image to the right.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The ancients' concept of divinity, their concept of God having a special relationship with humanity, a covenant with mankind stems directly from the misplaced assumption that Earth is somehow lies at the center of creation.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The Hubble Telescope shows us with remarkable clarity that this assumption is completely, utterly wrong.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">We do not lie at the center of creation. Our planet, wondrous as it is to us, is, as Carl Sagan said, nothing but "a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The idea that the Creator of hundreds of billions of galaxies and countless sextillions of stars (300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at last count) and innumerable planets beyond is somehow obsessively interested in our species, intervenes in our lives and answers our prayers is so narcissistic, egotistical and arrogant as to border on madness. It is akin to a human taking an interest in the moral dilemmas of atomic particles and answering their prayers. It is utterly ludicrous.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Hubble has shown us images from near the birth of the Universe. And the pictures it provides do not show the work of a divine hand, but the work of physics, chemistry and time. Our ancient conceptions of God cannot stand in the face of what we know. Our religions cannot maintain their arrogance and self-importance in the face of what we can see.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Even if the images from the earliest epochs of the Universe cannot disprove the existence of God, they drive a stake in the heart of the egotistical, anthropocentric nonsense of all our Earthly theistic beliefs.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Indeed, in many ways, the Hubble Telescope is atheism's greatest weapon. </div><img height="96" src="http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2010/04/hey_hubble_thanks_for_20_years/384605main_ero_omega_centauri_full_full.jpeg" style="filter: alpha(opacity=30); left: 624px; mozopacity: 0.3; opacity: 0.3; position: absolute; top: 204px; visibility: hidden;" width="80" /><img height="96" src="http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2010/04/hey_hubble_thanks_for_20_years/384605main_ero_omega_centauri_full_full.jpeg" style="filter: alpha(opacity=30); left: 511px; mozopacity: 0.3; opacity: 0.3; position: absolute; top: 407px; visibility: hidden;" width="80" />Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-2543530179234822562010-12-18T12:40:00.000-08:002010-12-18T12:40:45.095-08:00Because what the Government TOTALLY Needs is people Speaking in TonguesWow... There really aren't words to describe this. It must be watched. I'm certainly glad that this Woman's God is going to be interfering in the Democratic process because our Government totally needs people like <em>this</em> in power... Just wow... Is it any wonder that we demolish these people whenever we debate them?<br />
<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" height="295" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QtUwE-JrtUQ?fs=1" width="480"></iframe>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-3171865908772044912010-12-18T12:22:00.000-08:002010-12-18T13:15:14.449-08:00So Long DADT! Religious Bigotry Gets a Richly Deserved Kick in the Crotch<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img height="136" src="http://jellytoast.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/senate-floor.jpg" width="200" /></div><br />
The final repeal of DADT is now a foregone conclusion. With a cloture vote of 66-33, the repeal is no longer in question. It will happen today. Almost certainly within the hour.<br />
<br />
And with the repeal of DADT, one more vestige of religious bigotry will come crashing down.<br />
<br />
DADT is, was, and always has been grossly inequitable. It deprived American citizens of a central right on the basis of immutable characteristics based solely on <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/article/20101218/conservatives-rally-to-urge-defeat-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal/">bigotry</a>, <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100922/christian-groups-hail-vote-blocking-dadt/">religious hatred</a>, <a href="http://christiannightmares.tumblr.com/post/2152453599/the-liberty-council-on-dadt-and-moral-perverts">intolerance</a>, <a href="http://www.frc.org/newsroom/family-research-council-criticizes-senate-for-putting-social-agenda-ahead-of-military-mission">ignorance</a> and <a href="http://www.godhatesfags.com/">Christian asshattery</a>.<br />
<br />
If you doubt for even a moment that the oppression and denial of equality for homosexuals is motivated by nothing but the basest and crassest forms of religious bigotry, I invite you to visit a few of the nauseating links above. There is not and has never been any rational reason to deny homosexuals the right to serve in the military. Indeed, the SOLE reason this oppression has been allowed to stand is because of the tireless efforts of religious bigots.<br />
<br />
Let the following names be remembered by history as the bigoted douchebags they are:<br />
<br />
John McCain - Baptist<br />
Mitch McConnell - Baptist<br />
Richard Shelby - Presbyterian<br />
John Kyl - Presbyterian<br />
Jeff Sessions - Methodist<br />
George Lemieux - Roman Catholic<br />
Saxby Chambliss - Episcopalian<br />
Johnny Isakson - Methodist<br />
Mike Crapo - Mormon<br />
Jim Risch - Roman Catholic<br />
Chuck Grassley - Baptist<br />
Sam Brownback - Roman Catholic<br />
Pat Roberts - Methodist<br />
Jim Bunning - Roman Catholic<br />
David Vitter - Roman Catholic<br />
Thad Cochran - Baptist<br />
Roger Wicker - Southern Baptist<br />
Kit Bond - Presbyterian<br />
Mike Johanns - Roman Catholic<br />
Judd Gregg - Congregationalist<br />
Jim Inhofe - Presbyterian<br />
Tom Coburn - Baptist<br />
Lindsey Graham - Southern Baptist<br />
Jim DeMint - Persbyterian<br />
John Thune - Evangelical Christian<br />
Lamar Alexander - Presbyterian<br />
Bob Corker - Presbyterian<br />
John Cornyn - Church of Christ<br />
Orrin Hatch - Mormon<br />
Robert Foster Bennett - Mormon<br />
Mike Enzi - Presbyterian<br />
<br />
And let it be known that in the end, the bigoted, regressive, intolerant, assholes listed above were not enough to prevent rationality, reason, equality and justice from prevailing.<br />
<br />
So congratulations to all you guys in the LGBT community! Congratulations on delivering a swift kick in the crotch to Christian bigotry. You guys (and gals) have deserved this for a long time.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-91285334943145769162010-12-17T13:40:00.000-08:002010-12-17T13:50:05.508-08:00Does Atheism Matter?It has been brought to my attention that I am somewhat preachy. This does not exactly come as a surprise since I have been preachy my whole life, but I have been told that I have become 'preachy,' preachy in recent years.<br />
<br />
And I suppose that is true. I have become preachy. I like talking about atheism. I like thinking about it. Because I believe that we have something important to contribute - a perspective deserving of consideration and worthy of discussion. A perspective and point of view that has been marginalized and demonized or completely ignored for far too long.<br />
<br />
Atheism matters. It matters despite the utterly inane and substance free babbling of Mark Jeddry's <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-juddery/overrated-things-decade_b_790574.html#s196167">Huffington Post article</a>. It matters because large swaths of our domestic policy and foreign policy are heavily influenced by religious dogma that is patently ridiculous and incredibly harmful. Indeed, many of our most pressing national security and foreign policy problems stem directly from Religion.<br />
<br />
It matters because Religion is holding us back and exacerbating our problems.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
It matters because our largest national security threat is the threat posed by Islamic fundamentalists and those who fund them - people so blinded by religious fervor and misplaced aggression, hatred and rage they are literally willing to kill themselves in order to kill as many unbelievers as possible. These are men and women so blinded by ignorance that they are willing to kill and die over a ridiculous and patently false book of mythology.<br />
<br />
It matters because our problem with radical Islam is only compounded by Christian fundamentalists who overtly argue for a war of civilizations based on their own ridiculous and patently false book of mythology. These <a href="http://www.newshounds.us/2010/07/09/jon_stewart_nails_foxs_islamophobia_over_nasa_ground_zero_etc.php">Islamophobic</a> <a href="http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2010/10/18/fox-news-host-who-claimed-all-terrorists-are-muslim-says-he.html">fanatics</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiAtv8FCSeU">who</a> routinely <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAde8oQ8bL4">populate</a> <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/10/18/kilmeade_apologizes_for_muslim_comments">Fox News</a> openly advocate for a <a href="http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2010/10/20/fox-news-liberal-says-america-is-at-war-with-muslims.html">war against Islam</a> and engage in their <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKt7J1U1Cs8">sabre rattling nonsense</a> every single day.<br />
<br />
It matters because the answer to Islamic fundamentalism is manifestly NOT Christian fundamentalism.<br />
<br />
Even on issues that represent a clear and present danger to our <em>entire</em> species, our entire political apparatus is rendered impotent because of religious fools like John Shimkus (see below) who literally argue that Global Warming cannot be real because the Bible says that God says that "never again will I destroy all living things as I have done[,]" and Representative Shimkus, <em>who sits on the House Energy Committee </em>believes that to be the ineffable word of God.<br />
<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/U5yNZ1U37sE?fs=1" width="425"></iframe><br />
<br />
It matters because homosexuals are denied the right to marry and denied the right to fight for their country bases solely on Religious bigotry and has <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/California-Prop-8-Ruling-August-2010">no rational basis whatsoever</a>. Indeed, so caustic is the religious bigotry against homosexuals that the Proposition 8 decision is described as "<a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/augustweb-only/41.41.0.html">a significant step towards the full normalization of homosexuality within the culture</a>" which is apparently a BAD thing. Moreover, politicians oppose the repeal of the grossly inequitable and mindlessly arbitrary Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy on almost exclusively religious reasons. Indeed, when these politicians cannot overtly argue the validity of pointless religious taboo, they are forced to make <a href="http://pushingrope.blogspot.com/2010/08/mccain-crazy-rant-hate-crimes-dadt.html">increasingly strained</a>,<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/05/harry-reid-john-mccain_n_792173.html"> internally contradictory</a> and <a href="http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2010/12/03/jon-stewart-rips-mccain-his-resistance-repeal-dadt-paints-him-crazy-japa">nonsensical</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/02/AR2010020202588.html">justifications</a> for their religious bigotry.<br />
<br />
It matters because one third of our <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4Cc8t3Zd5E">Republican Presidential nominees</a> AND the previous <a href="http://phylogenomics.blogspot.com/2008/08/sarah-palin-on-evolution-creationism.html">Republican nominee for Vice President</a> are so ignorant of science that they do not even believe in evolution. And are actively attempting to teach children about magic in science class.<br />
<br />
It matters because just last week, the <a href="http://forbes.house.gov/PrayerCaucus/">Congressional Prayer Caucus</a> sent the White House a <a href="http://forbes.house.gov/UploadedFiles/National_Motto_Letter_to_President.pdf">letter</a> demanding that President Obama talk about the Christian God more. Something that will totally soothe our religious tensions with Islamic countries and is completely in keeping with our secular, pluralistic society.<br />
<br />
Atheism matters because Religion no longer serves any useful, valuable or constructive purpose. Religion has carried civilization as far as it can, but the reality is that it has outlived its usefulness. Religion has not advanced or progressed or revealed any new knowledge for hundreds if not thousands of years.<br />
<br />
At the same time, rationality and science has healed the sick, extended our lives, enriched our understanding of the largest and smallest phenomena in the Universe, allowed us to leave our planet, allowed us to unlock the mysteries of our DNA. Rationality and science have allowed us to peer into the deepest recesses of space and unlock the greatest mysteries humans have ever pondered. Our rational and scientific understanding of the Universe has grown exponentially over hundreds of years and will continue to grow.<br />
<br />
Atheism matters because it is the future. Atheism matters because we take rationality and science and empirical evidence seriously. Religionists do not. Atheism matters because we have better answers to the hardest questions in the Universe - and our answers grow better with each passing year. Religion still peddles the same mythology it has been peddling for thousands of years - no improvement, no progress, no revelation, no growth. And the stagnation of Religious understanding shows.<br />
<br />
Religion keeps us trapped in a small, closed, xenophobic, insular world of dubious <a href="http://meaningwithoutgodproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/for-god-so-loved-world.html">morality</a> based on magical fantasies concocted by our earliest ancestors during the infancy of our collective consciousness. It is not a path forward, it is a path to nowhere.<br />
<br />
Atheism matters because Religion is holding us back. Keeping us trapped in pointless wars because of trivial differences in our interpretations of ancient fairy tales. Keeping us from dealing with the most serious issues we face as a global community. Keeping us from treating our own citizens with the respect and honor they deserve.<br />
<br />
Atheism matters because we are the only ones who can look at both sides and tell them gently but firmly that they are both freaking crazy.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-19059845709741842032010-12-16T10:18:00.000-08:002010-12-16T10:49:56.274-08:00For God So Loved The World...<ol><li>He condemned an entire species to death and endless torment for all eternity because two people who didn't even know the difference between right and wrong were tricked by a talking snake that He put in the Garden into eating forbidden fruit that He also put in the Garden. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+3&version=NIV">Gen. 3:17-21</a></li>
<li>He drowned the entire globe because a handful of city states in the Middle East were insufficiently worshipful. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+6&version=NIV">Gen. 6:5-8, 17</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://www.viewfromthemount.org/images/Revelation.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="http://www.viewfromthemount.org/images/Revelation.jpg" width="320" /></a>He nuked two entire cities, killing every man, woman and child within for the sins of a few. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+19&version=NIV">Gen. 19:23-28</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">He became jealous and enraged at what He believed humans could accomplish with one language so he made it so that humans could no longer understand one another. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+11&version=NIV">Gen. 11:5-8</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">He demanded that his most faithful servant sacrifice his own son. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+22&version=NIV">Gen. 22:2</a></li>
<li>He delivered his Chosen people to the Egyptians who enslaved them, allowed them to be cruelly oppressed for generations, then hardened Pharaoh's heart and made him refuse to release His Chosen so He could glorify himself by slaughtering the first born children of an entire civilization. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&version=NIV">Ex. 1:8-14</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+10&version=NIV">Ex 10:25-27</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+11&version=NIV">Ex. 11:9-10</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+12&version=NIV">Ex 12:29-30</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">He ordered the slaughter of 3000 of his Chosen people and plagued the rest because a handful decided to worship Him in a way he found displeasing. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+32&version=NIV">Ex. 32:27-29, 35</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">He expressly endorses sex slavery for his Chosen people and just regular plain vanilla chattel slavery for foreigners. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021&version=NIV">Ex. 21:7-11</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2025&version=NIV">Lev: 25:44-46</a></li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">He demanded the genocide of the Amalekites <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2015&version=NIV">1 Sam. 15:2-3</a>, slaughtered the Amorites, Hittites, Caananites, Jebusites, Hivites, Perizzites, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus%2023&version=NIV">Exodus 23:23</a>, and simultaneously demanded that the Israelites break three of His Commandments - Coveting Neighbors Land, Stealing Neighbors Land, and Murdering to Steal Neighbor's Land.</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">And He promises that He will return and destroy the world again, pouring out his wrath and judgment against all mankind and destroying all that He has created in the process. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+8&version=NIV">Rev. 8:6-13</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+9&version=NIV">Rev. 9:1-6</a></li>
</ol><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">See! See how loving he is! He's positively oozing love.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-90272532395455862092010-12-15T09:52:00.000-08:002010-12-15T10:07:45.266-08:00Insufficient SalvationI was terrified of Hell as a child. The concept filled me with dread. As a six year old, I actually lay in bed for long hours while my mind raced in circles about the terrors that I was certain awaited me. On at least two occasions I even had to seek consolation from my parents in the middle of the night. <br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03_02/055jesus_468x498.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/03_02/055jesus_468x498.jpg" width="300" /></a>I was told that I didn't have to worry about Hell because of Jesus' sacrifice, that because of his crucifixion and resurrection I didn't need to be afraid of death or Hell. That Jesus' grace was sufficient.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Unfortunately, I was not convinced. The explanation made no sense to me. Jesus' crucifixion seemed totally unrelated to me. Totally insufficient. What did Jesus getting crucified have to do with my egregious sins of stealing cookies or disobeying the babysitter? Why would punishing Jesus wash my sin away? Why would God be satisfied with punishing the wrong person?</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Even as a child the concept of Jesus' sacrifice made no sense to me. How would punishing an innocent person, killing them, make anything better? The entire idea was ludicrous. Punishing an innocent person did not, in my mind, resolve the problem of sin, it compounded it.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Jesus' sacrifice did not diminish my fear of hell, or my certainty that I would be damned for all eternity. When I raised this issue a handful of times in Sunday School, I was pointed to God's love of animal sacrifice and how the sacrifice of animals as atonement of sin was prefiguring Jesus' perfect sacrifice, but this explanation didn't make any sense either.</div><a name='more'></a><br />
Why would killing a sheep or a goat or a cow relieve me of sin? Why would God care? The sheep or goat or cow didn't do anything wrong, what possible good would killing it do? How would that make me less guilty of sin? Less deserving of Hell. The entire concept seemed stupid. And why would God care? Why would God want to have us kill animals - let alone Jesus?<br />
<br />
Why would killing Jesus relieve me of my guilt and sin thousands of years later?<br />
<br />
I didn't understand.<br />
<br />
And I still don't. Because the reality is the entire salvation system established in Christianity makes no sense. The entire concept is firmly rooted in the reprehensible notion of original sin.<br />
<br />
We are unworthy of salvation not because of anything we do, but because of what we are? Even if we were to live perfect lives, our imperfect thoughts would be sufficient to condemn us to outer darkness. Salvation, whatever that is, may only be attained through reliance on and acceptance of the Divine Will. It is only through the acceptance of the dominion of the Divine Will that humankind can be saved. Only through external means may humanity be redeemed. Such a belief is staggeringly harmful.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Such belief systems may have made sense as a coping mechanism during the brutal, ruthless, savage times when the ancient texts were crafted. A means of providing comfort to those who regularly confront death, famine, disease, war, starvation. The ancient world was bafflingly capricious and cruel. In a world full of suffering that would be unbelievable in most of the modern world, it is utterly unsurprising that religious understandings would seek to justify or ennoble suffering. It is unsurprising that religious understanding would seek to explain the capricious and savage cruelty of the ancient world by describing us as fallen creatures <em>deserving</em> of suffering. But we no longer live in that world. Our world has moved on. <em>We</em> have moved on. We have evolved. Progressed. Such beliefs are wholly incongruent with the world in which we live.<br />
<br />
Such beliefs make no sense now.<br />
<br />
Indeed, the entire salvific system is irredeemably flawed. The concept of displacing the guilt of original sin through blood sacrifice seems ludicrously insufficient, pointless, barbaric. Try sacrificing a blameless goat or an unblemished chicken to appease your angry girlfriend after you've made an ass of yourself and see how far that gets you. Why would the Creator of the Entire Universe be easier to buy off? The very notion is insulting to the very idea of justice and mercy. Just as the idea of original sin is insulting to our humanity and an insult to all that we have accomplished.<br />
<br />
The idea that the slaughter of an innocent would somehow save us simply makes no sense.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-27247443904058621312010-12-13T09:06:00.000-08:002010-12-13T16:08:13.101-08:00Dungeons and Dragons vs. Church<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://encefalus.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/dungeons-dragons.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://encefalus.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/dungeons-dragons.jpg" width="145" /></a>Is there any substantive difference between a weekly gathering of Dungeons and Dragons geeks and Church?<br />
<br />
Let's find out!</div></div></div><ol><li>Does the weekly gathering involve getting together with close friends?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Is the weekly gathering facilitated by one member who guides the discussion?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Does the weekly gathering involve the use of a core group of dense and inscrutable books?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Do the inscrutable books require multiple guides, addenda, compendia, rulebooks and explanations to facilitate understanding of the central books?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Do some members of the weekly gathering support an extremely literal interpretation of the core rulebooks while other members advocate a more liberal and lax understanding of their tenets?</li>
<li>Do the people in your gathering use arcane terms and strange sayings that an outsider would find odd?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Does the weekly gathering involve 'serious' and occasionally intense discussions of invisible and/or magical beings?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Do the people in your group pretend that they are involved in an epic struggle of good against evil?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Does the group's epic struggle of good against evil involve magic and invisible beings, demons and spirits?</li>
<li style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Do the people at your weekly gathering actually believe that the magical beings and epic struggle you discuss are real?</li>
</ol><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">If you answered 'Yes' to 9 out of 10, then your geekly gathering is called Dungeons and Dragons.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">If you answered 'Yes' to 10 out of 10 then your weekly gathering is called Church.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-29209478545511724902010-12-10T09:57:00.000-08:002010-12-10T10:06:11.642-08:00Dinosaurs - Atheism's Gateway Drug<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a href="http://www.dinosaurusi.com/video_slike/eACFLOqowd-T-rex-donosaurus-dinosaurusi-dinosaur-najveci-zubi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="239" src="http://www.dinosaurusi.com/video_slike/eACFLOqowd-T-rex-donosaurus-dinosaurusi-dinosaur-najveci-zubi.jpg" width="320" /></a>Dinosaurs are perhaps the most dangerous and implacable enemy that Theists have ever faced. Which is ironic given the fact that (non-avian) Dinosaurs have been extinct for almost 60,000,000 years.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">I love Dinosaurs - I find them to be one of the most incredible groups of organisms to ever walk this planet. Their size, their ferocious appearance and their incredible collective longevity literally dwarfs our own. But while I love Dinosaurs today, as a child, I <em>loved</em> Dinosaurs. I was obsessed with Dinosaurs. I drew Dinosaurs. I made models of Dinosaurs. I read about them constantly. I could tell you how long a Diplodocus was from snout to tail. I could tell you how much an Ankylosaur weighed. I could even tell you which time period most of them lived in.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">So it was unsurprising that my first ever conflict with the Church arose out of my love of Dinosaurs. During Sunday School, the teacher walked up to the blackboard and drew a circle on it, then scribbled in some hasty continents. "How old is the Earth?" He asked. Even at the age of six I was something of a know it all. "Four Billion Years Old," was my immediate reply.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">"No. The Earth is 6000 years old."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><a name='more'></a><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">This answer was puzzling to me. Mainly because it was completely wrong and I knew it. It was the first time in my life that I had been really conscious of an adult's ignorance. Was it really possible that he didn't know about Dinosaurs? Impossible. Everyone knows about Dinosaurs. I knew I had to educate this poor man who didn't know about the Dinosaurs. "No. Dinosaurs lived hundreds of millions of years ago and the Earth is billions of years older than that."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">"No. Those are just lies spread by Evolutionists. The world is 6000 years old."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">At this point I was well and truly confused. This old man really didn't seem to know about Dinosaurs. How could this be? How was such a thing possible? Clearly he needed to be educated about the awesomeness of Dinosaurs. "No. Dinosaurs lived hundreds of millions of years ago. We have fossils of their bones. It takes millions of years for a bone to fossilize so we know how old they are. We even find fossils of swimming dinosaurs like Icthyosaurs in the mountains which shows how much the Earth has changed."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">"No. Those bones are in the mountains because of the Flood. And bones do not take millions of years to fossilize. The world is 6000 years old."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">"No. The world is billions of years old. I can show you."</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">And so began an increasingly heated and fruitless discussion between an old Young Earth Creationist and a six year old kid. The discussion eventually devolved from education to him yelling at me to be quiet and stop being disruptive. But I couldn't stop. It was the first time in my life that I had ever encountered an adult who maintained a position that I knew was completely factually wrong. It was the first time in my life that book knowledge had ever been openly attacked. Whenever I had a question about something, my parents pointed me to the Encyclopedia. They told me to look it up. They told me to read about it. This man was clearly confused - he was arguing with books? What kind of an idiot argues with the Encyclopedia?</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">The argument only ended when my parents were summoned. When the situation was explained, my parents, to their eternal credit, sided with me and told the Sunday School teacher that he was not to teach me that the world was 6000 years old when it clearly wasn't.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Dinosaurs are dangerous. They are dangerous because it is impossible to doubt their existence - their remains are literally everywhere. They are dangerous because their remains are so old and so ancient that they give the lie to our incredibly narcissistic and self-important vision of the Universe - the idea that we are somehow central, somehow privileged, somehow indispensable. Their reign of hundreds of millions of years makes our 5000 years of civilization look like nothing more than a footnote in the history of the planet. Their existence offers concrete physical proof of our smallness as a species in both space and time.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Dinosaurs are dangerous because they are awesome! And because their existence challenges the most fundamental underpinnings of theology. More importantly, Dinosaurs vividly illustrate the fact that life existed long before we did.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">And most importantly, when presented with a contradiction between the Bible and Dinosaurs, I chose Dinosaurs. I chose Dinosaurs because of the<em> evidence</em>. Because when presented with a choice between theology and empirical evidence, I chose evidence. Dinosaurs were my gateway drug to Atheism. And while I was still six or seven years away from reaching the conclusion that God either didn't care about us or didn't exist, the Dinosaurs had shared an important secret with me - that the Bible can be wrong.</div>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-50785246064776826642010-12-09T10:16:00.000-08:002010-12-09T10:17:26.357-08:00Theists are to Atheist Websites as 'Straight Guys' are to Gay Websites<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; text-align: left;">Come on Theists, just admit it, you're a little curious. We know it. You know it. You wouldn't be here otherwise.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">Just come out and admit it. It's okay. We're not bad... not really. ;) If you're a Theist and are spending time lurking on <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/">/r/atheism</a> or <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/">Pharyngula</a> or <a href="http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/">Debunking Christianity</a> or any of the other Atheist websites out there, you're almost one of us already. If you're a Theist and are spending time actually COMMENTING on Atheist websites, you're just a half step away from being a full fledged baby-eating scourge of humanity.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb5E27Bt6aT6CyG34PsHjVaffdiYpVh7hjyJ7bIG4nKk1DcP_P6dPLkz9znu_t-1dG30dFf2P8GEpcyh8O6lm7NZIk7ZY9RF0I4QjTZqKHZZ4UPgRbvzOAm36dPeU3THrHoxwldHzvuPk/s1600/untitled.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" n4="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb5E27Bt6aT6CyG34PsHjVaffdiYpVh7hjyJ7bIG4nKk1DcP_P6dPLkz9znu_t-1dG30dFf2P8GEpcyh8O6lm7NZIk7ZY9RF0I4QjTZqKHZZ4UPgRbvzOAm36dPeU3THrHoxwldHzvuPk/s400/untitled.bmp" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">It's okay Theists. We were there once too. We understand. Sure it <em>started</em> with a little harmless curiosity or unwarranted bravado. It started because you wanted to show us how evil we are. Or you were just curious. But eventually you found yourself sucked in. You found yourself on the losing side of arguments and couldn't figure out why, or you found yourself challenged in ways you hadn't experienced before.</div><div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;"><br />
</div>It may have <em>started</em> with harmless curiosity, but soon you'll be longing for more than just the cheap thrill of vicarious blasphemy - soon you'll want to taste it for yourself. Soon you'll be reading Dawkins or Dennett or Harris or Hitchens. Eventually you'll find yourself in explicit atheist chatrooms. Then you'll be visiting atheist bars and clubs. If you're a Senator, you might find yourself tapping out atheist code in a Minneapolis Airport Restroom. Just out of curiosity, of course.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">Each step of the way, you can tell yourself that it isn't true, that you're here to spread the light of Christ or whatever, that you're here to try and reach us, here to save us from our lives of wickedness and sin, but we all know that just isn't true. You're trolling our websites because you<em> like</em> it. You're here for the challenge, for the debate, for the thrill. You're here trolling because you <em>want </em>to be here.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
</div>But don't worry. There's no rush. Because we know you'll be back. We know time is on our side. We know that if you weren't interested, you wouldn't be here at all - you'd be safe with your flock rather than trolling the seedy baby-eating underbelly of the internet.<br />
<br />
It may have started because you were curious or wanted to prove us wrong, just be warned that if you continue down this road you too will probably end as the member of the very minority group you once hated and worked to destroy. And you know what, we'll welcome you. Because that is who we are.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-72064788343818214872010-12-08T11:31:00.000-08:002010-12-08T11:31:16.367-08:00My New HeroBrilliant answers... I wish I had a TV show. I'm pretty enough.<br />
<br />
<iframe frameborder="0" height="295" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tq7-GuiLGZ8?fs=1" width="480"></iframe>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-71025687205302393912010-12-08T08:28:00.000-08:002010-12-08T08:28:53.963-08:00Liberal Christianity = Form Without Substance<div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Liberal Christians are slippery beasts.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So slippery, that it is incredibly difficult to discern what, tenets of Christianity, they actually believe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of if they believe any of them at all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Trying to pin down a Liberal Christian on any tenet of theology is like catching a receding wave.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><a href="http://bobbleheadsofcelebrity.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Buddy_christ.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://bobbleheadsofcelebrity.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Buddy_christ.jpg" /></a>Where a literal fundamentalist will always stand their ground, loudly and proudly declaring that the Bible is literally true and any evidence to the contrary is wrong, the Liberal Christian will almost always concede that the no, Bible is not literally true . . . with the small caveat that there may be truth in it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, when pressed on almost any theological tenet, the Liberal Christian will concede, with a small caveat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i>Always</i> with a small caveat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Liberal Christians LOVE small caveats.</div><div class="Standard" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Indeed, the Liberal Christian's primary theological attribute appears to be reflexive equivocation and disdain for certainty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Liberal Christians HATE certainty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They despise it in all of its forms, equating<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>certainty with fundamentalism, with radicalism, with militancy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It appears to be the only consistent component of their theology.</div><a name='more'></a><div class="Standard" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">In this regard they greatly resemble agnostics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Indeed, an outsider listening to an atheist discussing theology with a Liberal Christian could easily mistake the Liberal Christian for either an atheist or an agnostic.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Liberal Christians doubt Biblical inerrancy, with the caveat that some of it may be true.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Accept the major tenets of evolution, cosmology and physics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With the caveat that we cannot know or explain everything.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Doubt the existence of miracles or the efficacy of prayer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With the caveat that we cannot know or explain everything.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Doubt the existence of Hell.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With that small caveat.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Doubt the exclusivism of Christianity (or Islam or any other Religion).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With that small caveat.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Doubt the idea that God intervenes in the affairs of human beings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>With that small caveat.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-family: StarSymbol; font-size: 9pt; mso-bidi-font-family: StarSymbol; mso-fareast-font-family: StarSymbol;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">●<span style="font: 7pt 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span>Some doubt that God even exists as any kind of 'Being' at all – content with the idea that God COULD simply be some kind of nebulous organizing principle that gives purpose to living things – rather like the Force in Star Wars before George Lucas fucked it up.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">When pressed, the Liberal Christian will almost always yield ground and will almost always concede . . . with that small caveat of uncertainty.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">In truth, most Liberal Christians are Cultural Christians and Theological Agnostics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Cultural Christianity provides an excellent social framework where they can focus on the parts of the Bible they like – those that preach love and peace and fellowship and allows them to maintain a believe in their deep seated desire for life everlasting.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While at the same time, their Theological Agnosticism allows them to discard all of the parts they don't like – the wrathful, petty, vengeful, interfering, bigoted, homophobic, misogynistic, child-killing, slave demanding, war-making, blood sacrifice demanding God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ultimately, Liberal Christianity exhibits a preference for the form of Christianity rather than its substance.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">While this seems to be reasonable and accommodating and understanding, it poses two problems. The larger problem is that far too many Liberal Christians allow their cultural affinity for Christianity to serve as an excuse to remain silent in the face of fundamentalist bigotry and intolerance. Far too few Liberal Christians are willing to speak boldly against the casual homophobia and intolerance that infects so much of fundamentalist Christianity.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">Moreover, it is an ultimately empty, vapid and useless epistemological framework.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Either our senses tell us true things about the Universe or they do not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If our senses tell us <i>true </i>things then we can use our senses and those we augment with technology to tell us <i>true</i> things about the Universe.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">If our senses do not tell us true things about the Universe, then our knowledge of existence is reduced to GIGO where nothing is true, logic is meaningless and all epistemology is rendered useless anyway.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While that is certainly an epistemic and philosophical <i>possibility</i>, it seems highly improbable given the degree of success we have in applying our sensory driven knowledge to the physical world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And even if our senses do NOT tell us true things about the Universe, given our flawed perceptions we would have no way of KNOWING they were wrong anyway.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">The reality is that we DO know things about the Universe.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Enough to apply the knowledge we have gained to send ships and satellites into orbit, enough to take detailed pictures of galaxies billions of light years away and analyze their chemical makeup, enough to facilitate virtual discussions via electromagnetic radiation transmitted via wireless signals all over the world, enough to crack our own genetic code.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We know LOTS of things about the Universe and can do incredibly awesome things with that knowledge.</div><div class="Standard" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><br />
</div><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Tahoma; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Arial Unicode MS'; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">To be sure, we may never be able to have absolute, unequivocal, beyond any scintilla of doubt, KNOWLEDGE but to require that kind of knowledge is unreasonable, paralyzing and self-defeating.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Especially when that standard of proof is ONLY applied to questions of the supernatural.</span>Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4866132102596655836.post-62756549378027241142010-12-07T10:16:00.000-08:002010-12-07T10:16:49.984-08:00The Ten Commandments - Mostly Useless<div style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="Moses Smashing the Tables" height="320" src="http://moshereiss.org/messenger/06_moses/rembrandt_mosessmashingtables.jpg" width="259" /></div><br />
The Ten Commandments are mostly worthless.<br />
<br />
God botherers like <a href="http://articles.cnn.com/2003-11-13/justice/moore.tencommandments_1_ethics-panel-state-supreme-court-building-ethics-charges?_s=PM:LAW">Roy Moore</a> and Representative <a href="http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/70730/june-14-2006/better-know-a-district---georgia-s-8th---lynn-westmoreland">Lynn Westmoreland</a> R-GA love the Ten Commandments. Westmoreland and Moore love them so much that they demand they be displayed in every public building because they "provide the moral and legal foundation for our civilization" and "without them we would lose our sense of direction." Of these ten foundational, imperative, paramount moral and legal principles, Westmoreland was able to name three.<br />
<br />
The truth is that the Ten Commandments are mostly useless and serve no moral or legal purpose whatsoever.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
1. <strong>Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.</strong> This commandment is completely worthless. It provides no moral or legal guidance whatsoever - akin to a Commandment that Thou shalt not recognize Unicorns or Pixies or Faeries. Commandments that do nothing more than stroke Yahweh's massive and completely unwarranted ego are completely useless.<br />
<br />
2. <strong>Thou shalt not make or worship graven images.</strong> Yet another worthless commandment. Honestly, the Creator of the entire Universe comes down to our planet, takes the time to actually give us specific commands and THIS is what he gives us? Don't make statues? Really? Another useless commandment that does nothing more than stroke Yahweh's massive ego.<br />
<br />
3. <strong>Thou shalt not take the lord's name in vain.</strong> Really? No swearing? God dammit! Another meaningless Yahweh ego stroking commandment. Don't make fun of Leprechauns! Don't insult Cthulu.<br />
<br />
4. <strong>Honor the Sabbath by keeping it holy</strong>. Honestly, we're nearly half way through the entire list of THE MOST IMPORTANT MORAL AND LEGAL DOCUMENT EVER and the ONLY thing the document has done is stroke Yahweh's massive ego. Honoring the sabbath does not make one moral. It does not lead to a better life. It does not advance human kindness or fairness or equality. Four out of ten and not one sound legal or moral principle. No wonder Representative Westmoreland can't remember them.<br />
<br />
5. <strong>Honor thy Father and Mother.</strong> Finally. This is the first Commandment that actually posits an actual moral position and is actually somewhat useful. To be sure, this is not a legal commandment. And to be sure, many fathers and mothers are not actually worthy of honor, so the commandment is not universally applicable, but as a general proposition, this is actually somewhat worthwhile. Congratulations Yahweh, you finally got one. <br />
<br />
6. <strong>Thou shalt not murder.</strong> And so we come to one of the Commandments that people actually remember. This is the first actual legal principle articulated in the Ten Commandments and it is actually an indispensable legal principle that, unsurprisingly, exists in every single culture.<br />
<br />
7. <strong>Thou shalt not commit adultery.</strong> Another fine moral principle. Not one that is or ever has been particularly well followed, or one that is a recognized legal principle in any Christian or Jewish state, but nevertheless it is a sound moral principle that people should try to follow. Ironically, the only states where this commandment actually carries legal weight are in Islamic countries.<br />
<br />
8. <strong>Thou shalt not steal.</strong> This is one of the other Commandments that people actually remember - mostly because it is an indispensable legal principle in every single culture in human history.<br />
<br />
9. <strong>Thou shalt not bear false witness.</strong> This is the final Commandment that people usually remember - mostly because generally speaking, people know that it is bad to lie, cheat, steal and kill.<br />
<br />
10. <strong>Thou shalt not covet.</strong> Really? Why not? Even if we don't act on it? We shouldn't think about and dream about bettering ourselves? We shouldn't look at what other people have and desire that for ourselves? To be sure, it is wrong to TAKE what other people have, but that is already covered by the no stealing, no adultery, no killing Commandments. Coveting is merely a thought - a desire - to prohibit that merely constitutes a meaningless and completely useless thought crime.<br />
<br />
So for those of you keeping score: Five are completely worthless. Two represent good moral aspirations. Three represent indispensable legal principles. In other words, SEVEN of the Ten Commandments are so disposable that they do not even make it into modern legal systems.<br />
<br />
God could have done so much better. Instead of engaging in Yahweh's useless ego stroking and punishing thought crimes, God could have said:<br />
<br />
Thou shalt not discriminate against one another on the basis of sex, nationality, religion.<br />
Thou shalt not enslave one another.<br />
Thou shalt not torture.<br />
Thou shalt provide equal protection for all citizens under the law.<br />
Thou shalt not arbitrarily deprive citizens of property.<br />
Thou shalt not arbitrarily arrest, detain or exile.<br />
Thou shalt presume the innocence of the accused until they are proven guilty.<br />
Thou shalt not interfere with the privacy of others.<br />
Thou shalt ensure the freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech.<br />
Thou shalt provide for the safety, welfare and security of all your people.<br />
Thou shalt educate your people.<br />
<br />
Those are all actually provisions of the UN Declaration of Human Rights. All of which would be a dramatic improvement over Yahweh's ego stroking commands. They actually provide a basis for a more just, equitable honest, fair, egalitarian and peaceful society. Surely an omniscient being could have come up with such commands. Surely an omniscient being could have designed a society in such a way.<br />
<br />
Instead Yahweh wastes the bulk of his divinely authored tablets stroking his own ego. Further, Yahweh wastes chapter after chapter after chapter of the Biblical legal code discussing how exactly all of his <a href="http://meaningwithoutgodproject.blogspot.com/2010/12/yawehs-insatiable-bloodlust-nsfw.html#more">blood sacrifices must be prepared</a> and then going on to describe in even greater detail the exact measurements and construction methods for <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+37&version=NIV">the Ark</a>, the exact <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+39&version=NIV">style of dress for priests</a>, the <a href="http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://christthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/pillar-cloud-tabernacle.jpg&imgrefurl=http://christthetruth.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/exodus-40/&h=489&w=600&sz=65&tbnid=BCXIsNboOC8jUM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dexodus%2Btabernacle&zoom=1&q=exodus+tabernacle&hl=en&usg=__xKvFZYoVHBkTefJAPB9MYqBZ4UA=&sa=X&ei=XXb-TLfWFJT2tgOJsoWxCw&ved=0CB4Q9QEwAQ">dimensions of the tabernacle</a>, the width of doors and windows, etc. In other words, VAST amounts of legal doctrine that could have been used as the foundation of a more just, more fair, more peaceful, more virtuous society are instead squandered on useless and pointless laws that do NOTHING but give Yahweh a chance to design buildings, braziers, arks, candles, tents and priestly vestments.<br />
<br />
One has to wonder why the Creator of the Entire Universe would have the slightest inclination to waste his time on such pointless and trivial matters when he could have simply outlawed slavery or torture or warfare. The Ten Commandments are worse than mostly useless - They are a colossal waste of opportunity.Jeffrey A. Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03932419322314950738noreply@blogger.com5