Supernatural Completion

I finally ordered the proofs for my 6 volume book, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology. It will be available for the Holiday Shopping season.
Volume 1: Cosmology of God & Jesus
Volume 2: Cosmology of Christianity
Volume 3: Cosmology of the Bible
Volume 4: Cosmology of the Dark Side
Volume 5: Cosmology of Science
Volume 6: Cosmology of Atheism


Three years in the making, this is not a project I would like to do very often. It was mentally, emotionally and physically draining. The amount of research, double-checking, rewriting, formatting and other such mundane details were often mind-numbing. Then there was the constant decision-making about what information goes where--the subject of each volume often overlaps the subject of another, and I was constantly trying to keep track of where it all should go. It was, literally, like working on six books at a time. I crashed my Firefox browser and Word frequently.


But I believe this work is unique, in that it is in 6 volumes; I didn't have to hyperfocus on one area of the subject matter, and condense it down so much. I could cover the territory i wanted to cover--share my journey--without leaving out any crucial bits that ultimately led me to my personal cosmology. I addressed each one I felt was primary in the search for understanding. So the book is fairly comprehensive in that way, though i learned quickly that there could have been another 6 volumes.


Just a couple stats:

• In all 6 volumes combined, there are 1,322 pages and I used 477 sources.
• I referenced Wikipedia only once, because it was the only place to get a biographical tidbit on a certain person. Otherwise, i used only reputable sources--science, news magazines, journals, newspapers, books-- including many translations of the Bible, and translations of the Septuagint, Pseudepigrapha and other apocryphal texts.

I drew from a wide array of source-types and areas of study. The information and examination I used considered many different disciplines. Some of those include:

• anthropobiology --  study of human biology
• anthropology -- study of human cultures
• archaeology -- study of human material remains
• astronomy -- study of celestial bodies
• bioecology -- study of interaction of life in the environment
• biology --  study of life
• bionomics  -- study of organisms interacting in their environments
• Egyptology -- study of ancient Egypt
• epistemology -- study of grounds of knowledge
• genesiology  -- study of reproduction and heredity
• genetics -- branch of biology that studies heredity and variation in organisms
• geochronology -- study of measuring geological time
• geogeny --  science of the formation of the earth's crust
• geogony -- study of formation of the earth
• geography -- study of surface of the earth and its inhabitants
• geology -- study of earth's crust
• geomorphogeny -- study of the origins of land forms
• glossology  --  study of language; study of the tongue
• historiology --  study of history
• ichnology  -- science of fossilized footprints
• iconography -- study of drawing symbols
• iconology -- study of icons; symbols
• ideogeny --  study of origins of ideas
• ideology -- science of ideas; system of ideas used to justify behavior
• idiomology -- study of idiom, jargon or dialect
• lexicology --  study of words and their meanings
• liturgiology  -- study of liturgical forms and church rituals
• metaphysics --  study of principles of nature and thought
• microbiology -- study of microscopic organisms
• micropalaeontology --  study of microscopic fossils
• mythology --  study of myths; fables; tales
• neuropsychology -- study of relation between brain and behavior
• noology -- science of the intellect
• palaeoanthropology -- study of early humans
• palaeobiology -- study of fossil plants and animals
• palaeontology -- study of fossils
• patrology -- study of early Christianity
• philology -- study of ancient texts; historical linguistics
• philosophy -- science of knowledge or wisdom
• physics --  study of matter and its motion through spacetime
• pisteology -- science or study of faith
• psychology --  study of mind
• psychopathology -- study of mental illness
• satanology --  study of the devil
• sedimentology  -- study of sediment
• semantics -- study of meaning
• sociobiology -- study of biological basis of human behaviour
• sociology -- study of society
• stratigraphy -- study of geological layers or strata
• theology --  study of religion; religious doctrine
• thermodynamics -- study of relation of heat to motion
• zooarchaeology --  study of animal remains of archaeological sites
• zoogeography -- study of geographic distribution of animals
• zoogeology  -- study of fossil animal remains
• zoology -- study of animals

If understanding belief, religion, God, and truth creates a list like that, then over-simplification of science by Believers,  is a little  infuriating.

This has been a taxing journey for me, but one which had to be taken. I have grown so much in my knowledge and understanding, and I have absolutely no doubt where i stand on the issue of religion. For myself, or for the world. My hope is that readers will find this work compelling, entertaining, informative and helpful in their own discernment of what they do and do not believe.

Supernatural Completion

Science Heals, Religion Steals

Excerpt from

Supernatural Hypocrisy: 

The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology

Volume 5: The Cosmology of Science

“Science has done more for the development of the Western civilization 

in one hundred years than Christianity did in eighteen hundred.”
~John Burroughs

WE ENJOY THE SPOILS OF MODERN SCIENCE and technology which allows us to soar into the clouds and reach any destination in this manner, both quickly and comfortably. Individuals from antiquity must have lamented -- and had much time to lament -- the laborious tedium of traveling from point to point by foot or by beast. It is no wonder that mythology hosts an inherent wish to fly by its creation of the Phoenix, Pegusus, Sirens, Harpies, Griffins, Cherubim, Angels, vampires (as bats) and even Superman. We seem to maintain an uncommon fondness for the miraculous and the mythical, even to our own detriment and to the annihilation of others in our species, as well as the lesser species in our food chain. But just as we have assimilated into this technological society with our actions, so must our hearts and minds move from the imaginings of despairingly tedious superstitious history toward the truth which resides in realism.

Science has proven itself valuable time and again. It has been the messenger of understanding to the human race for some time now. Even myths that are still stubbornly clung to, have been proven false through the process of scientific method and empirical testing and double-blind examination.

For instance, the hoopla about the Shroud of Turin was eventually shown to be just that. Carbon dating showed that the fabric was not old enough to have been the burial cloth of Jesus, even if we accept the postulate that Jesus lived at all. Archeologists have also recently found another shroud that carbon dates to the alleged time of Jesus, (between 1 and 50 CE) but its material (not available in that region at the time) and its weave (too complex for the time) supports the finding that the Turin shroud was created in the Middle Ages, between 1260-1390 CE.

The Jerusalem tomb in which the new shroud was found, had been sealed shut with plaster for the last 2,000 years, and scientists suspect it was not opened for the second burial (it was customary to rebury the dead after a year) because they were trying to prevent the spread of tuberculosis and leprosy, which was found in the DNA of the bones in the recently discovered shroud.

This information should act as precursor to our ability to scrutinize mysterious discoveries, before we attach a magical explanation to it. It should extend to other seemingly miraculous things.

For instance, we know now that God did not carve out the Grand Canyon with his giant cosmic spoon. We know it began to form almost 17 million years ago,[1] by the process of water and wind erosion, continental drift, volcanism and the behavior of the Colorado River.

We have been schooled in the realities of stage magicianship, and allowed ourselves to be amazed while also knowing that this performer has no mystical gift bestowed by an endowment from dark arts, or an omniscient being, but is merely fooling us with his skills at sleight-of-hand and optical illusion. And many will depart from that auditorium and next day, to be found in church, worshiping that invisible being with complete and utter devotion. Until those stalwart believers admit there that is no difference in the two, we will remain a nation with believers in the majority, and will suffer for its various consequences.

---------------------------

[1] Wilford, John (2008-02-06). Study Says Grand Canyon Older Than Thought. New York Times.

Science Heals, Religion Steals

Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

1. Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers
2. Honk If Your Religious Beliefs Make You An Asshole
3. Intelligent Design Makes My Monkey Cry
4. Too Stupid to Understand Science? Try Religion.
5. *There's A REASON Why Atheists Don't Fly Planes Into Buildings
6. "Worship Me or I Will Torture You Forever. Have a Nice Day."­ God.
7. *God Doesn't Kill People. People Who Believe in God Kill People.
8. If There is No God, Then What Makes the Next Kleenex Pop Up?
9. He's Dead.
   It's Been 2,000 years.
   He's Not Coming Back.
   Get OVER It Already!
10. *All religion is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry. Edgar Allen Poe.
11. Viva La Evolución!
12. Actually, If You Look It Up, The Winter Solstice Is The Reason For The Season
13. I Wouldn't Trust Your God Even If He Did Exist
14. Cheeses Is Lard. Argue With THAT If You Can.
15. *People Who Don't Want Their Beliefs Laughed at Shouldn't Have Such Funny Beliefs
16. Jesus is Coming? Don't Swallow That.
17. Threatening Children With Hell Is FUN!
18. GOD - APPLY DIRECTLY TO FOREHEAD!
19. Jesus Told Me Republicans SUCK
20. *God + Whacky Tobacky = Platypus
21. God Doesn't Exist. So, I Guess That Means No One Loves You.
22. When the Rapture Comes, We'll Get Our Country Back!
23. Q. How Do We Know the Holy Ghost Was Catholic?
    A. He Used the Rhythm Method Instead of a Condom.
24. You Say "Heretic" Like It Was a BAD Thing
25. I Love Christians. They Taste Like Chicken.
26. *Science: It Works, Bitches.
27. "Intelligent Design" Helping Stupid People Feel Smart Since 1987
28. I Found God Between The Sheets
29. I Gave Up Superstitious Mumbo Jumbo For Lent
30. My Flying Monkey Can Beat Up Your Guardian Angel
31. Every Time You Play With Yourself, God Kills a Kitten
32. *If God Wanted People to Believe in Him, Then Why Did He Invent Logic?
33. Praying Is Politically Correct Schizophrenia
34. *ALL Americans Are African Americans
35. *I Forget - Which Day Did God Make All The Fossils?
36. I Was An Atheist Until The Hindus Convinced Me That I Was God
37. The Spanish Inquisition: The Original Faith-based Initiative
38. *If we were made in his image, when why aren't humans invisible too?
39. *JESUS SAVES....You From Thinking For Yourself
40. *How Can You Disbelieve in Evolution If You Can't Even Define It?
41. *Q. How Can You Tell That Your God is Man-made?
    A. If He Hates All the Same People You Do.
42. Every Time You See a Rainbow, God is Having Gay Sex
43. I Went to Public School in Kansas and All I Got Was This Lousy T-shirt and a Poor Understanding of the Scientific Method.
44. WWJD = We Won. Jesus Died.
45. The Family That Prays Together is Brainwashing the Children
46. Oh, Look, Honey Another Pro-lifer For War
47. *Another Godless Atheist for Peace and World Harmony
48. God is Unavailable Right Now. Can I Help You?
49. When Lip Service to Some Mysterious Deity Permits Bestiality on
    Wednesday and Absolution on Sundays, Cash Me Out. Frank Sinatra.
50. No Gods. No Mullets.

Top Fifty Atheist T-Shirt and Bumper Sticker Aphorisms

PROOF: Shroud of Turin Face is NOT Jesus

This is one example of why I love science so much!

The image on the shroud has the same proportions as Da Vinci's face, a study found

By
Martin Evan
Wednesday July 1, 2009

AN image that has intrigued the Christian world for hundreds of years is a fake, it has been revealed.

A study claims to have unearthed evidence proving that the image on the Turin Shroud is not that of Jesus but is in fact Leonardo da Vinci – the Renaissance painter and scientist long suspected of ­faking the hallowed relic.

Experts believe the image was transferred to the cloth using early photographic techniques, the details of which have come to light thanks to computer technology.

The discovery was made by Lillian Schwartz, a graphic consultant at the School of Visual Arts in New York, famous for her theory that the Mona Lisa was also based on a self- portrait of Da Vinci.

Ms Schwartz used sophisticated computer scans to reveal that the faces of the Mona Lisa and the Turin Shroud bear exactly the same dimensions as Da Vinci’s head.
Experts have described the breakthrough as the most exciting discovery in the shroud’s mysterious history. Da Vinci has long been suspected of faking what is believed to be Christ’s burial cloth and historians believe he would have had the necessary skills to pull it off.

According to the research, which will be revealed in a ­documentary on channel Five tonight, Da Vinci created the image using a primitive photographic technique known as camera obscura. He hung the fabric over a wooden frame in a blacked-out room before coating it in a light-sensitive substance.

Then he used a sculpture of his own head and face to project an image onto the linen.

The permanent print was scorched on the cloth when the sun’s ultra-violet rays passed through a crystal lens set in one of the walls.

Ms Schwartz came to prominence in the 1980s with her experiments to measure the Mona Lisa and compare it with a self portrait of Da Vinci.To her amazement, the faces lined up perfectly, leading to the conclusion that the famous painting must have been based on his own image. When she was asked earlier this year to compare another Da Vinci self-portrait to the face on the Turin Shroud, she was stunned to discover the proportions of the key facial features were again identical.

She said: “It matched. There is no doubt in my mind that the proportions that Leonardo wrote about were used in creating this shroud’s face.” The program claims Da Vinci was not only a heretic with no qualms about faking Christ’s burial cloth but was the only person in that era with the knowledge to produce it.

He was also a pioneer in the field of primitive optical technology, with his notebooks containing one of the earliest drawings and descriptions of a camera obscura.

The theory is that Da Vinci’s forgery was commissioned to replace an earlier version that was exposed as a poor fake, which had been bought by the powerful Savoy family in 1453 only to disappear for 50 years.
----------------------------------------
from http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/111039/Leonardo-da-Vinci-is-face-on-Turin-Shroud-

PROOF: Shroud of Turin Face is NOT Jesus

Propaganda: No Intelligence Allowed

I just watched the documentary by Ben Stein "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" I must say the title is prophetic toward content. There was certainly no intelligence to be found in the slant of this "documentary."

This is essentially another example of right-wing religious propaganda that likes to masquerade as fact. It is at once crucial that readers understand the primary flaw in any argument made by creationists or I.D. advocates: creationism cannot be given equal time as science, since it does not fit the description of science, nor does it hold up to scientific scrutiny. That said, I'll take a deep breath and continue...

Next, allow me to point out that all those whom Stein interviewed who were summarily dismissed from universities for merely uttering the words "Intelligent Design" were not victims at all. This was a distorted and inaccurate representation of what actually happened. Please read Michael Shermer's essay on this here: Ben Stein's Blunder. Shermer was misled and lied to about the content of the documentary, even the very NAME of the documentary, as was PZ Meyers, of the infamous Pharygula. See his blog, The Simple Falsehood at the Heart of Expelled, and just search the word "Expelled" on Pharyngula for other blogs about it. Meyers was even barred from attending a screening of the film Expelled. A police officer told him he was instructed by the producer to be kept out, or he would be arrested. See his blog on this here.

Also, see the Richard Dawkins site, for this article, which I found delightfully delicious in Dawkins' usual intelligent style of prose. There were other scientists who were railroaded in this documentary, due to their acceptance of the tenets of evolutionary theory.

As if these sins were not sufficient, a particularly heinous effrontery was offered by Richard Sternberg, upon whom Stein spent a good deal of focus. Shermer explains:

Stein, however, is uninterested in paleontology, or any other science for that matter. His focus is on what happened to Sternberg, who is portrayed in the film as a martyr to the cause of free speech. “As a result of publishing the Meyer article,” Stein intones in his inimitably droll voice, “Dr. Sternberg found himself the object of a massive campaign that smeared his reputation and came close to destroying his career.” According to Sternberg, “after the publication of the Meyer article the climate changed from being chilly to being outright hostile. Shunned, yes, and discredited.” As a result, Sternberg filed a claim against the Smithsonian for being “targeted for retaliation and harassment” for his religious beliefs. “I was viewed as an intellectual terrorist,” he tells Stein. In August 2005 his claim was rejected.

According to Jonathan Coddington, his supervisor at the Smithsonian Institution, Sternberg was not discriminated against, was never dismissed and in fact was not even a paid employee, but just an unpaid research associate who had completed his three-year term!(Shermer)

Without question, the most offensive part of the film was the overt message that evolution goes hand in hand with Nazism, and the events during the Hitler Regime. In Stein's interview of Sternberg, the latter suggests that Hitler's book, Mein Kampf is clearly an evolutionist document. I have addressed the mistaken idea before that Hitler was an atheist, and therefore atheists are evil. See the excerpt from my book, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology under the blog entry "The A.I. of Theists" where I rebut this claim with the actual text of Mein Kampf). History is rife with corrupt individuals who adapt certain ideas to their own uses. This does not, however, mean the original idea was corrupt.

Stein also offers up the argument that eugenics and euthanasia are patently evil. I wrote about the Eugenics question in a paper I republished here. As for the euthanasia issue, one of those he interviewed said that it was somehow an act of irreverence for human life. I beg to differ and instead assert that it is precisely the opposite. But those types of volatile issues can always be manipulated by emotion and fear by creationists. Creationists come by this method naturally, since they worship a god who also manipulates through emotion and fear. Take, for example the interspersed black and white clips used in Expelled from various historical events like the Nazi gas chambers, bullies beating up a smaller young man, and a scene from the Planet of the Apes where a mean old ape takes a water hose and blasts poor Charlton Heston (Moses, right? a BIBLICAL HERO. The inference is not wasted on me, though its insidious attempt at subliminal propaganda might be lost on those less attentive) Can you say Propaganda? I can. And I will. What Ben Stein has done is nothing less than exploit the Holocaust and all its victims in order to achieve his questionable purposes.

Another alleged victim of the "Nazi-Science machine of evolutionists" in the film was Caroline Crocker. But as the thorough examination of this claim showed in another article by Shermer "Crocker shows either a shocking ignorance of evolutionary science, or a rather shameless willingness to distort the truth."

Richard Dawkins offers an open letter to a commenter on Shermer's site, wherein he tries to clear up the awful misrepresentations and outright lies that Expelled represents.

The Devil is in the Doctrine. Be Aware, and Beware, good readers: there are lies being constantly perpetuated by people like Ben Stein. This is not new. But it is infuriating.

Propaganda: No Intelligence Allowed

Ukrainian in the Lion's Den

"A man shouting "God will save me if he exists", lowered himself by a rope into the big cats’ enclosure in Kiev zoo, Ukraine, on Sunday, 4 June, when the zoo was packed with visitors. He then took his shoes off and went up to the lions. A lioness knocked him down and severed his carotid artery, killing him instantly. Lions and tigers are kept in an “animal island” protected by thick concrete blocks. "*

Another example of why religious zealotry and the BIBLE can be dangerous. Remember "Daniel in the Lion's Den"?

------------------------
* http://www.forteantimes.com/strangedays/strangedeaths/379/an_act_of_faith.html

Ukrainian in the Lion's Den

The Religious Have Less Brain Activity

from
http://www.physorg.com/news155404273.html

Researchers find brain differences between believers and non-believers

Believing in God can help block anxiety and minimize stress, according to new University of Toronto research that shows distinct brain differences between believers and non-believers.

In two studies led by Assistant Psychology Professor Michael Inzlicht, participants performed a Stroop task - a well-known test of cognitive control - while hooked up to electrodes that measured their brain activity.

Compared to non-believers, the religious participants showed significantly less activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a portion of the brain that helps modify behavior by signaling when attention and control are needed, usually as a result of some anxiety-producing event like making a mistake. The stronger their religious zeal and the more they believed in God, the less their ACC fired in response to their own errors, and the fewer errors they made.

"You could think of this part of the brain like a cortical alarm bell that rings when an individual has just made a mistake or experiences uncertainty," says lead author Inzlicht, who teaches and conducts research at the University of Toronto Scarborough. "We found that religious people or even people who simply believe in the existence of God show significantly less brain activity in relation to their own errors. They're much less anxious and feel less stressed when they have made an error."

These correlations remained strong even after controlling for personality and cognitive ability, says Inzlicht, who also found that religious participants made fewer errors on the Stroop task than their non-believing counterparts.

Their findings show religious belief has a calming effect on its devotees, which makes them less likely to feel anxious about making errors or facing the unknown. But Inzlicht cautions that anxiety is a "double-edged sword" which is at times necessary and helpful.

"Obviously, anxiety can be negative because if you have too much, you're paralyzed with fear," he says. "However, it also serves a very useful function in that it alerts us when we're making mistakes. If you don't experience anxiety when you make an error, what impetus do you have to change or improve your behaviour so you don't make the same mistakes again and again?"

The study is appearing online now in Psychological Science.

Source: University of Toronto

The Religious Have Less Brain Activity

Is God Pissed with Christians?

I'm sensing a trend, here. My previous post was about god electrocuting a preacher in the baptismal. Now, he's allowing someone to gun down the pastor? Is god turning on his PEOPLE?

Pastor gunned down in Illinois church Posted: 02:38 PM ET

(CNN) — The pastor of a Maryville, Illinois, church was shot to death during a service Sunday in front of horrified parishoners who then tackled the gunman, state police said.

Fred Winters, the pastor of the First Baptist Church, was shot and killed during the 8 a.m. service, while his attacker and two parishoners suffered knife wounds, Illinois state police spokesman Ralph Timmins said.

The gunman walked in during the service and walked up to the pulpit, opening fire when he was met by Winters, Timmins said. The man’s .45-caliber pistol jammed after he shot Winters, and he pulled out a knife and turned it on himself before being tackled by some of the roughly 150 worshippers attending the church,
Timmins said.

Two of those who went after the attacker suffered non-life-threatening injuries, while the suspect’s injuries are “very serious,” Timmins said.

Thankfully in my Baptist Church we have 2 police officers who wear their guns under their suit coats during services. My heart goes out to the congregation and families at that church in Maryville IL


Okay, a couple of questions:
1. why does this poster need armed police officers in his congregation? Does this happen a lot?
2. Can't your God protect you in His own house?

I mean, let's assume, for a quick, brainless moment, that there is a mythical omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being in the cosmos. Doesn't it seem like he's pissed at christians?

Is God Pissed with Christians?

God Still Kills His Own

Consider this gem.

Texas preacher killed by baptism

A pastor was electrocuted during a baptism in Waco, Texas, after grabbing a microphone while partially submerged. [Another candidate for the Darwin Award]

Rev Kyle Lake, 33, was standing in a small pool used for baptisms at the University Baptist Church when he was electrocuted on Sunday morning. [If god is willing to send his own son into a horrible death by crucifixion, why would he care about some preacher from Waco?]

Rev Lake reached out to adjust a nearby microphone, which produced an electric shock, said church pastor Ben Dudley. [Dudley was also thinking, Sweet Christ, that could have been me.]

Rev Lake, who had a wife and three children, had been at the church for nine years. [He became an authority on advising people about their mortal souls at the age of 24?]

Confusion

He was taken by ambulance to a local medical centre where he was pronounced dead. [Jeez, I hope he was baptized].

The woman being baptised apparently had not stepped into the water, Mr Dudley told the Waco Tribune-Herald. She was taken to the hospital as a precaution, but was not seriously injured, he said. [I'm willing to bet she might reconsider the act of baptism...unless of course she is devout. Then, naturally, she'll do anything in the name of god.]

"At first, there was definitely confusion just because everyone was trying to figure out what was going on," Mr Dudley said. "Everyone just immediately started praying." [Yeah, good idea. When someone is being electrocuted, drop everything and start praying. That ought to give him the help he needs].

At a remembrance attended by about 1,000 people on Sunday night, Mr Dudley said the congregation would move forward as a church. [yes, as a church who witnessed god killing their preacher. Wonder who will step forward to take his place, considering god's distaste for this church and its preachers?]

"I don't know how, when, why, where or what's going to happen, but we will continue as a church in the community because that is what Kyle would have wanted," he said. [I daresay what Kyle would have wanted, was to NOT be electrocuted].

If I believed in god, I would have to say this was one of his "signs"--but WHICH ONE?
was it:
(a) Don't do any more baptisms
(b) This is a preacher in whom I am NOT well-pleased.
(c) The Lord moves in mysterious ways
(d) god needed help up in heaven, that only THIS preacher could provide, because you know, an Omnipotent being will always need help.

Once again, god kills indiscriminately, even while his adherents are doing what they think He wants. Or maybe (here's an idea) it had nothing do do with god, and everything to do with the interaction of electrical mechanisms and WATER.

-------------------
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4394722.stm

God Still Kills His Own

Honk if You'll Kill for God

(from my book in progress, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology")


...We have had time to evolve since those dark days. Yet, how could we, when there were so many examples and encouragements to keep us uncivilized and vicious?

In the story of Abraham and Isaac most Americans are familiar with, God commanded Abe to sacrifice his son to Him. Old Abe never batted an eye. Good thing an Angel stilled his hand just in time. Abraham was praised and promised blessings because he feared the Lord enough to sacrifice his son, whom he loved, because "God" told him to.

Abraham's "devotion" to God makes him a model of faith to Christians and Jews alike. . .right. But a model of WHAT? I have a few suggestions. How about a model of zealotry? A model of stupidity? A model of a schizophrenic killer?

What would have impressed me more, and made a great deal more sense, is if Abraham would have instead said, "I will not kill my son for you, because to ask this of me proves that you are evil, and I will neither worship nor obey an evil God." That would have shown Abraham to be truly a model for other people-not of faith, which this shows is not a positive thing to have, but a model of ethical, loving behavior. This would have also shown him to have courage in the face of some request made by a God he worshiped, but who had obviously become something not worthy of adulation or obedience. And if God had really been testing Abraham's mettle, He would have responded, "You are indeed a man of great courage and integrity and compassion and ethics, and I am well pleased." But as we all know, that's not what happened.

To anyone reading this, Christian or not, if you really believed God was telling you to kill your own child, would you do it? It is my most fervent wish that all of you will answer a resounding and unhesitating "No." If you answered otherwise, you are no better than Abraham, and no better than our more modern example of the 39 year old Texas woman, Deanna Laney, who thought that God told her to kill her three sons. She managed to succeed with two of them, sparing only the infant, who will now have a life of dependency on others, since the injuries from the attack will forever render him incapable of self care.

As a nation of ethical, loving, and compassionate people, we were shocked and disgusted by this heinous act. Why do we see this behavior as abhorrent in real life, but hold it up as some paragon of virtue when referring to faith and the Bible?*

Oh, it gets worse. This next tale is not one I ever heard before reading the Bible, and it is glaringly apparent why not. It's another example--not so summarily candy-coated--of why blind faith can be one of the most evil things in existence.

Jephthah. He made a stupid promise to God that if He would award him victory in battle, he would sacrifice the first person to walk out of his house and greet him, after returning from a mission of slaughter in war, and give this doomed candidate as a burnt offering to the Lord. **

When Jephthah returned home from the exhilarating slaughter of thousands, the target for sacrifice turned out to be his daughter. He just decided, "Oh, oops. Too bad, have to kill her. I promised."

I can mark that off to human stupidity, but then, God didn't stop him. Was God stupid? Or just unfathomably mean? God allowed Jephthah to kill his own daughter, and proves Himself again, a blood-thirsty apathetic being.

With complete comfort, I challenge God Himself to come down here and explain that one to me. But God won't do that, because though Christianity is one of the "revealed" religions, this in no way indicates that God ever reveals Himself in any real way.

Both of these stories are examples of religious zealotry, not at all contrary to what the Muslim hijackers did when they piloted the planes into the Twin Towers. They, too, were following the literal instructions given to them in their holy books, the Koran and the Hadiths, (which is second only to the Koran in sanctity, and gives more detail about the life of Mohammad).

Now, it would be cowardly of me not to think about this, and what it really means. A parent would actually kill his own child because some deity told him to-told him, apparently, by way of a voice in his head. (Isn't this similar to what murderous schizophrenics experience?) Abe didn't know God would stop him. He did it with the fullest intention of completing the hideous task. And Jephthah not only did the same thing, but came up with the wager by himself, as a way to reach his dubious goal of successful, widespread slaughter.

So. This still happens today, though not cloaked in the shroud of admirable character. Quite the opposite is true, isn't it? God didn't stop Deanna Laney, either, though she was about to kill her kids believing that's what God wanted. Why didn't God step in and say, at the very least, "No, no, Deanna. . I'm not doing that stuff anymore. I decided it was better to just kill my own son to cover all the sacrifices we might need in the future, and be done with it." (Well at least God did what he expects of others, that one time). But God didn't stop her, just like He didn't stop Jephthah. Thankfully, our judicial system did something about it, by putting her on trial, judging it wrong and worthy of punishment. Unfortunately, she was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and was committed to a mental facility for an unspecified period of time.

But if you are either guilty or insane for thinking that God told you to kill your kids, are either of those valid reasons to defend the virtues of Blind Faith?
Um. No.
-----------------------
*And more poignantly, there is no mention of how Isaac felt after his sacrificial test. I can't imagine that he would be able to love his father after being tricked and nearly killed by him. The two dead Laney children could not be reached for comment, and the one who survived won't ever be able to comment.
** First, I am struck by the absurdity of this deal. Why would anyone make such a vow in the first place?

Honk if You'll Kill for God

Pascal's Wager: Hedging The Bet

(from my book in progress, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology")


One explanation that often comes from the lips of the faithful is this: "I'm not sure, but I think I will go with the God is real thing, just in case--if I do, and it's true, I'll be covered; if I don't, and it's true, I'll burn in hell."  This is known as Pascal's Wager. [1]

First, this ideation doesn't address WHICH God you should accept or worship. This is often referred to as the "avoiding the wrong hell" conundrum.

And what if God is real, but there is more than one god? How do we know which guidelines to follow for the god of that particular faith?

And there can be a negative consequence for believing something that isn't true. Refer to the plethora of historical documents, and even current incidents where Christian Scientists believe that prayer, rather than medical intervention, will assure the safety of their children, and those children suffer and die.

At the root of this hedging mentality is a religion of fear. If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent (the 4 Omni's) as well as the Alpha and Omega (beginning and end), Infinite, Incorporeal,[2] and Ineffable[3]....the most perfect and indeed the original being in the universe, then why does He need to be worshiped? Why would He care? A perfect, non-human being would not have a human division of consciousness like ego, much less any human emotions we tack onto him.

There's an essential point to be had here, and that is the tendency Christians have to anthropomorphize God-that is to say: personify or humanize Him. This being, as He is understood by Christians, is anything BUT human. If this deity exists, and is what Christians testify to, then he is INCAPABLE of having His feelings hurt, or being lonely; if he were, he is simply not the God Christians tout, and thus not worthy of worship anyway. An imperfect being does not warrant worship. And if the "truly inspired word of God" is to be our touchstone, then I submit God is not only imperfect, but mean, petty, cruel and, at times, evil.

It makes more sense to me that I make my decisions about what I believe based on sensible arguments, on empirical evidence, or the lack thereof. If we were not meant to use the reason inherent in our working brains, then why would we have it? If God is the Creator of us all, why would he create beings with the ability to choose to deny Him?

As previously mentioned, according to Christians, God needs us to worship Him. So creating something that was contrary to His needs, when he has complete and utter power over the process, is again nonsensical. And another example of the inherent contradiction of the Christian God.

I have had my moments of clarity over this. One came when I sincerely and earnestly asked God to show Himself to me. I told God that if He could show me he was real in a way that was undeniable to me, personally, that I would not only admit I was wrong, but would spend the rest of my life helping others to believe in Him too. This was not the first time I had had this little discussion with God. But they all garnered the same result. No sign; No message, no change at all. A silence that was cosmically deafening.

I know that Christians will be quick to say that this was because I didn't have enough faith. (Again, anther ad hoc argument that falls flat in the face of reason). But I know for a fact that my faith was larger than that mustard seed found in Matthew 17:20. And I wasn't trying to move a mountain, nor was I asking God to move one. I was asking for a clear sign. I got nada.
The absence of a sign gave me another sign. (A sin of omission by God?) The sign that said "God is not real."

At the same time, I have other moments when I wonder. But I am smart enough to recognize that any reticence I have to completely deny the existence of God is attributable to religious insemination--my fear that if I'm wrong, I might meet a horrible fate that includes the mind-numbing pain of feeling my skin melt off in the furnace He so lovingly provided for me throughout eternity. If I had no other reason, that concept alone is enough for me to turn away from this deity, even if I don't ultimately deny His existence entirely.
-------------------------------

[1]“Pascal's Wager (or Pascal's Gambit) is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal that even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should "wager" as though God exists, because so living has potentially everything to gain, and certainly nothing to lose. It was set out in note 233 of his Pensées, a posthumously published collection of notes made by Pascal in his last years as he worked on a treatise on Christian apologetics. Historically, Pascal's Wager, ground-breaking as it had charted new territory in probability theory, was one of the first attempts to make use of the concept of infinity, marked the first formal use of decision theory, and anticipated the future philosophies of pragmatism and voluntarism.” (Wikipedia).
[2]Having no material body or form.
[3]Incapable of being expressed in words.

Pascal's Wager: Hedging The Bet

Mibber Who?.

(from my book in progress, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology")


"Mibber is loving and wise. Mibber is the essence of all matter and energy. Mibber has not limits. Mibber is all powerful."

When hearing statements such as these, it is not our first inclination to ask "What does that mean, in relation to this "Mibber"? or "how is it that Mibber can be all these things?" your first question is naturally, "What IS Mibber?"

First, we must define an object before we can even begin to examine the other questions that arise once we understand the fundamental nature of that object. The same is true, or at least should be true, of the Christian God. I find it aggravatingly fascinating how Christians make announcements and declarations about what God feels, thinks, does, and intends...but have no explanation for the nature of God. What is God? Who is God? How do they know this information?

In one breath, they say that God is mysterious and unknowable and in the other, they say that God is loving, or God is wise, or all-powerful. How can they know any of this if they don't even understand God and have never met him/her/it in person?

No one has ever had a real conversation with God. No, not even Neale Donald Walsch. Claims to the contrary have been grossly exaggerated. They have only had mental processes which they ascribe to an encounter with this invisible entity. One could just as easily-and with as much credibility-say that one has had a conversation with a tree, or a dog, or Elvis. The difference with the latter is of course that we do have actual evidence of the tree, the dog and Elvis.
But again, there is this pervasive, almost cellular habituation attached to the God-paradigm. As a species, humans have had belief in supernatural beings as part of the fiber of everyday reality. Prevalence doesn't, however, make it real.

Further, why would a person chose to believe in something impossible? If something is black, it cannot also be white. If something is square, it cannot be circular. This is akin to the statements most Christians make about God, the essence of which is, "God remains dry when immersed in water." On the face of that, unless it is trickery, this is contradiction at best, and deceit at worst.
The very first explanation that springs to the lips of the devout is some variation of "God moves in mysterious ways." I'll say! Any being who can exist but be invisible, embody the essence of love, yet be angry, and remain dry while immersed in water, is certainly beyond comprehension and so advanced as to be worthy of our attention. Except for one thing. There is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It's almost certainly not true. And since no one can prove the existence of this god, we are left only with a choice to believe in something not only unproven and improvable, but in something that is illogical and fraught with contradiction at every turn.
Pardon me while I lean toward the more rational approach.

Mibber Who?.

The Furnace of Furniss

(from my book in progress, Supernatural Hypocrisy: The Cognitive Dissonance of a God Cosmology")

A popular booklet for children in the late 19th Century was authored by Father Furniss, an English priest who wrote "books for children." Furniss delighted in describing the horrors of hell:

"...his eyes were like two burning coals. Two long flames came our of his ears...sometimes he opens his mouth, and breath of blazing fire rolls out. But listen! There is a sound just like that of a kettle boiling. Is it really a kettle boiling? No. Then what is it? Hear what it is. The blood is boiling in the scalding veins of that boy. The brain is boiling and bubbling in his head. The marrow is boiling in his bones. Ask him why he is thus tormented. his answer is that when he was alive, his blood boiled to do very wicked things."

and,

"A little child is in this red-hot oven. Hear how it screams to come out! See how it turns and twists itself about in the fire! It beats its head against the roof of the oven. It stamps its little feet on the floor. You can see on the face of this little child what you see on the faces of all in hell--despair, desperate and horrible."

Father Furniss was paradoxically dubbed the "Children's Apostle."

The Furnace of Furniss

Kissing Hank's Ass

Kissing Hank's Ass