Skip to content

What happens when you anger the gods…

Many women who do not dress modestly lead young men astray and spread adultery in society which increases earthquakes…

…Seismologists have warned that the capital, Tehran, is situated on a large number of tectonic fault lines and could be hit by a devastating earthquake soon….President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said many of Tehran’s 12 million inhabitants should relocate….There are plans to build a purpose built new capital near Qom.

Makes you wonder… why move on account of fault lines, surely the all powerful Allah requires not tectonic plates to cause earth quakes? One might also say that Ahmadinejad is trying to outsmart his god by moving his capital, one would have thought that more dangerous than showing a bit of hair underneath your hijab…

While on the subject of crazy Islam…

This is Iranian humanity. This woman will not be stoned to death for having  sex with two other men after her husband died, they will murder her humanely for it instead.

Thank you Allah for your infinite wisdom.

Posted in Other, Paradoxical |&| Problematic, Religion is Bad.

St. John Doe

Christ as John Doe

Christ as John Doe

John Doe gets lost in the fact that he cant really grasp anything, so he hangs on to the concept of God to explain the misunderstanding away.

Posted in Other.


So how long before the synthetic cell is quoted as proof of  Intelligent Design?

It seems the Vatican is a step or so ahead..

Posted in Other.

Answer to the question of Morality: Why should we be good?

It is a common argument against ‘atheism; godlessness; etc': “If there was no ‘God’, society would be doomed to an ultimate decay fueled by general rape, murder and pillage.


We don’t have to be good. Strictly speaking, there is no reason to even believe that good and /or  evil exist/s beyond human (perhaps animal) consciousness or experience. It is nothing more than survival instinct. Life = Good, Death = Evil, it is truly as simple as that. A strive to survive is in the essence of every living organism. This is why we are ‘good’, we are hard wired to be as it ensures the survival of life.

So we don’t have to be good, we just can’t help it.

Posted in Give unto Caesar, Other, Paradoxical |&| Problematic, Why Gods do not Exist.

The only fact about Agnosticism

There is only one thing that an Agnostic can in earnest say about agnosticism, which is that it is impossible to know if agnosticism is right or if it is wrong.

Posted in Other.

In gods (us) we trust

In every god you will find nothing but aspirations of men: wisdom, power,  respect.  The god craving is in us all, diminished perhaps in the clinically depressed. If no such things as gods exist, we can’t become one. Due to our god craving, belief in and hope for the existence of deity is there for natural and largely inevitable.

Posted in Other, Why Gods do not Exist.

Follow the evidence

Flew, Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Antony Garrard Newton FlewThere is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind. [A Book Review, kind of]

There has been many attempts by theists to claim empirical evidence to justify a belief in gods. Once in a while one stumbles upon relatively original arguments, but just like the arguments for atheism, these original ones are far and wide apart. Many if not most arguments from, for and against either side are as old as ancient Greek philosophy.

Flew, in 2004 managed to jump the fence from atheism to theism, deism to be slightly more precise.  Here we are looking at a distinguished philosopher who was, perhaps not really the world’s most notorious atheist as the some what arrogant tittle implies, but an atheist of note none the less. A  fair amount of controversy  followed suit.  Atheists revolted in ad hominem defense and every Christian with an ear on the ground rejoiced and thanked Jesus [piece be with him] for finally showing Flew the way, forgetting of course that he did not actually convert to Christianity [perhaps not yet].

Now back to the book. It is, as supernatural advocating books go, not actually a bad one, one might suppose, well apart from the terrible preface by Roy Abraham Varghese who seems mostly interested in discrediting Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett  -and other “new atheists”- whilst using Flew mainly as a marketing tool for himself and Christianity.

The arguments Flew seems  to put forward basically come down to the following theistic philosophical clichés:

  • Who wrote the laws of nature? Order and symmetry means design: The “origin” of reality, natural laws and life proves the existence of a conscious creator.
  • Did the universe know we were coming? The fine tune argument: Conditions in the universe are tuned specifically to favour the existence of  a universe and “inevitably” life, so a god (or ultimate mind) must have planned and caused it.
  • Life is too complex to come about naturally.  The argument from design: Life is so improbable that it could not possibly have come about without the intension and intervention of a conscious creator.
  • How did matter become self aware? The problem of consciousness: How does inanimate matter turn into self aware, conscious entities?

The arguments/assertions are two really: Existence in itself proves the “prime mover”;  The complexity of life proves the existence of a ‘life planner’.>>

Logical Positivism.  Flew makes a point of mentioning logical positivism many times during  the first few chapters taking us through his atheist years,  alluring to the idea that it (logical positivism) is not the be all and end all of philosophies.  He perhaps go as far as insinuating that it is indeed fundamentally flawed.  A  simplified explanation of logical positivism is this: We can believe in what we can prove; Observational evidence is indispensable for knowledge of the world.  Flew is definitely steering away from this principle. This I would have thought is mainly because of logical positivism’s insistence on using empirical evidence when explaining reality and perhaps he can still feel deep down inside that religions have none of that.

This brings me to his collapse in reasoning.  While reading on to the latter part of his book (where he defends  conversion to theist/deist ideas), what becomes clear is that he has now stopped thinking things through with the vigorous thoroughness of his past. I cant help but think, biasedly perhaps, that if he actually stayed true to the Socratic principle of following the evidence where it may lead (which he places serious emphasis on throughout the book), he would have come out an agnostic, not a theist/deist since there simply is currently no concrete, empirical evidence either for the existence or against the existence of some kind of creator/designer god. So what evidence is it then that he follows into the The Valley of the Shadow of Death?

Perhaps Richard Dawkins’ opinion on Flew and the god of the gaps really is not that far off. It is not evidence that Flew is following but really the opposite, the lack there of. As one reads through the second half of the book he starts dishing out the ‘evidence’ for an “ultimate mind” which is the source of all creation, all of reality.  It all boils down to mainly the Argument from Intelligent Design, perhaps one of the worst ever contrived  but at the same time one of the  most ‘popularly successful’ arguments for the existence of deity.  In short, the argument goes: Look around you, everything has structure, is very complex and looks designed, there for only a conscious intelligent mind could have created it. Even Flew leaves small hints to this lack of evidence in his conclusions which  have the following feel to them: “these things that we only know about – the origin of life; the rules of reality; structured complexity, emergence of consciousness –  i.e. the  things that  we do not currently fully understand seem unfathomably natural, so the only possible cause or explanation is that of  an ultimate mind, a conscious god…“. It is not at all made clear why, when things seem currently unfathomable to humans, their only possible explanation is that of a creator god. Also, these are problems, not proofs.

All and all its a good read though and better than some I have read like Ray Comfort who’s simplistic views and lack of philosophical thinking makes reading tedious and frustrating. Readers from the creationism side is sure to enjoy it.

Posted in Other, Paradoxical |&| Problematic.

Watching the pot boil

darwin_as_chimpWe do not “see” the earth moving,  hair growing,  evolution happening… but they are all right there  staring you in the face.

This link is somewhat relevant:

“Oh foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not.”

Posted in Evolution, Paradoxical |&| Problematic.

Making sense of tea leaves

The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma.Abraham Lincoln

Astrology and the Bible

Astrology and the Bible

There is this old custom called Tasseography. It is a bizarre ritual, a divination or fortune-telling method that interprets (what most would call random) patterns in tea leaves, coffee grounds, or wine sediments: “The tea leaves are telling me you are thinking about some thing beginning with a B…  “. Essentially a complete load of Bullshit and most thinking people will agree (one might hope).

Enough about that nonsense and onto some of the gods’ nonsense to complete this teadious parody.

The Bible.

A few relevant bits of information about the Bible:

  • The Bible’s Old Testament was composed and compiled between the 12th and the 2nd century BC. The concept of zero as a number had not yet been discovered by man.
  • The Bible’s New Testament was started some time after 30 AD (give or take) and compiled in (roughly) it’s present form by the 4th Century AD. What was written down about Jesus was done so many years after he died, likely by people who never knew him (No,  Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did not write the gospels, these books mysteriously get attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John by the year 180).  Also, by now the concept of zero as a number had still not yet been discovered by man (This happens in India by the 9th century AD).
  • It is not agreed by the differing Abrahamic sects as to which books belong in the Bible, the Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Greek Orthodox, Slavonic Orthodox, Georgian, Armenian Apostolic, Syriac and Ethiopian Churches (amongst others) all disagree on the canons. God it seems, is not very clear.
  • There are an abundance of death penalty punishments strewn all over the Bible; There are countless rediculous rules ranging from what we may or may not eat to how we are supposed to treat gay people; There are even acid tripping bits of Revelations that make Stephen King’s and Dean Koontz’ imaginations look pale in comparison.
  • etc…

What we end up finding is an out of date piece of literature, a historically and socially significant but morally and functionally out of date piece of prose masquerading as the ultimate self help book. We have almost every proponent of theism, creationism, and the supernatural taking the existence of deity as a priory fact. From here they then try to deduce and re conciliate understood reality with that of a conceptual, original ultimate mind. The Mind that the Bible tells them is out there, their Biblical source of reality. They start with the Bible and try to ‘retrofit’ reality to it. Christian fundamentalists are really just literalist followers of this out of date moral system found within the Bible. The smart ones are constantly trying to re-interpret the Bible, make more and more parts “symbolic” and “figurative” to make it seem less absurd within a modern perspective.

Trying to make sense of the Bible, is like trying to make sense of randomness.

Posted in Paradoxical |&| Problematic, Why Gods do not Exist.

All non-Christians are Satanists

This little jewel is posted on

the bible is real

the bible is real

“All non-Christians are Satanists First, a very short introduction about me. I won’t reveal my name online due to privacy reasons, although I can say three things about me. I support no party in the current United States politics. I am a Christian. And I believe in the Bible to be God’s true words. So let me state what I want to say in this entry: Many seem to think that Satanists are simply people that worship Satan voluntarily and practice witchcraft. However, that is wrong. I would like to widen the definition of “Satanist” to all those who do not accept Christ. As Luke 11:23 says, all those who are not with Christ are against Him. By not accepting Christ, one supports Satan, regardless of whether he/she knows it or not. Every rejection of Christ grows Satan stronger. Jews and Muslims think they oppose Satan, although they are actually supporting him by not following Christ. Members of non-Abrahamic religions and non-religious people lack a belief in Satan, although they are actually supporting him by not following Christ. As shown above, all those who do not believe in Christ are Satanists. Not accepting Christ as the Savior is showing support to Satan, and supporting Satan is what Satanists do. 작성자: The Biblical Christian.”

Perhaps nothing more than a lone article on blogspot but it is still telling about humanities’ failing grasp of reality. In short, the above text asserts that since, according to the Bible,  Jesus declares in Luke 11:23He that is not with me, is against me” all non-Christians are doomed devil worshipers I.E. any person adhering to a world view other than (presumably these days ‘not so strictly speaking’)  that of Christianity are followers of the Christian underworld god, Yahweh’s nemesis, Superman’s Lex Luther, Sir Lucifer, potential heir to Heaven’s thrown: Lord Beelzebub. This little leap of faith is simple, literalist, probably fundamentalist and definitely, completely uninformed. The first mistake is getting the Bible  involved. Forget the Bible, it knows almost nothing relevant to contemporary reality and is only and mainly educational in so far as giving us insight into social human history and culture is concerned. Empirically it has little more to offer. The next problem is assuming the Existence of Lord Beelzebub. Not only are we led to believe that there is an all encompassing super being that has omnipotence, we also have to believe that ‘He’ has that alter ego anti  super being counterpart who does not apparently have omnipotence but still some how manages to apose the ultimate omnipotence… ?!!? It is of course the problem of evil rearing it’s ugly head. The question here then seems to become one regarding the addequacy of theist philosophers’ methods of dealing with the Problem of Evil. I think that question remains to be answered. Then, to finish up and  play back the old ad homonym: The speaker, likely, does not  understand debate. He, she, it, that or whatever has not shown anything apart fom an inability to think.

The Biblical Christian is a spammer an idiot, or a sucker (i.e. Idiot).

All hail Lucifer (Find me on Facebook: Luci Fer).

Posted in Paradoxical |&| Problematic, Religion is Bad, Why Gods do not Exist.