Inhalt

God Who Cares? (Atheist)

by DeYtH Banger

Further

Okay... let's go further.. I don't promise you to like this whole theory... or what next is happining... if you are atheist you gonna love what next is comming... but if you are believer... probably with good material... you gonna question your beliefs.

PLENY OF YOUTUBE CHANNELS HAVE BEEN CLOSED BECAUSE

OF THE TRUTH... ATHEIST CHANNELS ALSO BEING CLOSED... HOW FAR WILL WE GO?

ARE WE REALLY FREE?

As last I want to take part of the argument... let's see what are the final results... because some atheist say that they don't believe in "Your God"... but probably there is a higher being... other say that there isn't.. then we spin around the spirtual bullshit....

Oppression and Religion

Peter R Taylor

“Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind; and, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.”

— Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

Oppression of one sort or another is endemic among humans and includes parental bossiness; bullying; street violence; and systematic, institutionalised repression of groups and individuals for reasons as varied as ethnic and racial difference; intellectual superiority or inferiority; gender; religious beliefs; atheism; sexual orientation; wealth or poverty; perceived social class. Oppression matters because it diminishes us as humans and many sufferers never recover, becoming street-kids, dropouts, depressives, suicidal, substance abusers, criminals, insane…

Everyone in our society has been forced at some time or other into operating as both oppressor and oppressed. Until we understand the deeper nature of oppression, our struggle to end it will be in vain. We will continue looking for “the enemy out there” and thus carry on the long, sad history of desperate, bewildered human beings replacing dictators with tyrants; Kings and Queens with Presidents….

Parents must think carefully about their relationship with their children. If they present the world as a dangerous place with murder and hurtful people, along with a “That’s the way it is” attitude, they can instill a sense of powerlessness in children so that when they become aware of other forms of oppression, they will accept them without fighting back. No person would ever agree to, or submit to, being oppressed unless a pattern of oppression acceptance had been installed in early childhood.

Oppressors have usually first been oppressed and then manipulated onto the other end of the oppression pattern.

This is old human knowledge. For example: child abusers have usually been abused themselves as children. One becomes a member of the English “ruling class” by being taken away from parents at an early age and sent to special boarding schools to be tortured and systematically degraded in the most inhumane ways: being kept as “slaves” by the older students, running the gauntlet, etc. Then, as older students, being manipulated onto the other end of the pattern, forced to give the same vicious treatment to the younger boys in preparation for their “ruling” role.

Victims of oppression frequently internalise this and eventually oppress themselves. One of the most disheartening examples of internalisation is seen in homophobia. For centuries the oppression has been so severe that nowhere in the world have gays been able to respond freely, kiss and hold hands in an open atmosphere without fear, and thus have been forced underground like dissidents in the most totalitarian of countries. Seeing few positive gay role models around, young gays are unable to freely choose their true sexual identity. And so they end up loathing homosexuality before reaching adulthood, adopting and internalising heterosexual definitions of good and bad, and are forced throughout their lives into painful, futile attempts to ‘heterosexualise’ their lives with the same crippling effect on self-image as when blacks straightened their hair to “pass” as white. To avoid internalisation (or frequently suicide) they are forced to leave family and friends for exile in big-city ghettos not unlike traditional Jewish ghettos in Europe, Catholic ghettos in Northern Ireland or black ghettos in the U.S. Far too many suffer a slow death from internalisation in futile, destructive intermarriages with heterosexuals.

Most permanent damage done by oppression is done by its internalised form.

Throughout human history, commonsense and promotion of ‘the common good’ have never been the aim of governments. Control of human life has always been exercised by the bully who could control the most powerful militias, while the control of citizens’ minds has been perfected by organised religion. Rulers needed the approval of religious leaders to function, so laws have usually been based on religious precepts. The state protected religion; religion validated the state. Hand in hand, Kings and Bishops; Sultans and Imams; Chiefs and Witchdoctors, have trampled over the rights and bodies of their subjects. This situation still exists throughout Africa; in all Muslim countries; most of the Americas; and is increasing in the U.S.A. and Australia. After fifty years of attempting to avoid sharing the spoils of power with the Orthodox Church by presenting the philosophy of Communism as a religion, Russia has conceded defeat and once again shares power with the bishops and the country is again on the path to totalitarianism.

Without exception, every government that shares power with religion is more or less corrupt, cruel, indifferent to human rights, and persecutes those who get in their way, disagree, or displease them. The stronger the influence of religion – it doesn’t matter which one – the more oppressive the regime. Compare devoutly Christian Cameroon and devoutly Muslim Iran… there’s little difference. On the other hand, when Spain rejected seventeen centuries of Roman Catholic dictatorship, it changed from the most repressive and oppressive country in Europe, to the most liberal! The Dark Side of Faith

It seems that the least oppressive societies are those of Western Europe, Canada, Scandinavia, and New Zealand. South Africa is doing its best to reverse the years of oppression in every field – with laudable success. However, Australia, by slavishly following the U.S.A. in everything: – industrial law reform: ‘homeland security’; war games; education; health reforms; refusing equal rights to same-sex-oriented people; reduction of welfare; incarcerating refugees in prison camps; Leaving David Hicks to rot; consulting religious leaders when formulating policy; enacting laws to please Christians in marginal electorates…is becoming more oppressive, and can no longer call itself either Secular, Fair, or Just.

Look at the recent ‘debate’ on RU486. Just about every Christian male member of parliament voted against the removal of Roman Catholic Minister for Health Abbott’s right to veto its use, believing, as their religion demands, that women are inferior and should be subject to domination by males.

Howard won his last election on the lie that granting equality to same-sex-oriented citizens would undermine the state – a lie promulgated [in the face of mountains of contradictory evidence] by the powerful Christian lobby. According to Cardinal Pell and his Anglican and fundamentalist bedfellows, so great was this threat to national security that it took precedence over terrorism, the economy and all else, requiring a special session of parliament be convened to change the constitution to ensure that same-sex-oriented people can never have equality in Australia, and their oppression will continue – along with the hate crimes, murders, bashings, and suicides that are always the result of State-sponsored oppression. When the State oppresses, disaffected bullyboys to do their dirty work for them, crime proliferates, and a once-peaceful society crumbles.

How long is it since women were promised equal opportunity and equal pay? Why hasn’t it happened? Because our parliaments are stacked with Christian males.

And why does nothing change? Because over the last few decades taxes have been funnelled away from State Schools to religious ones, and governments allow Christians to preach their nonsensical propaganda in State Schools, brainwashing children into believing in supernatural hob-goblins and supermen, rather than learning to think! This is mental child abuse of the worst kind.

The philosophy of oppression has become so rooted in society that most people are not even aware of it and, as in the religious wars in Ireland, Iraq, and Afghanistan, or the murdering of U.S.A. abortion doctors, whoever kills, thinks he does God a service.

France recently forbad the wearing of ostentatious symbols of religion in State schools, to preserve their secularity. Australia and the U.S.A. were quick to attack this decision. Why? Because we are already under the thumb of religion; Christianity, Islam and Judaism. The recent furore over a few cartoons is a scandalous attempt to demolish our secular freedoms – to subject us to the same restrictions as they suffer. No one, anywhere in the world in any country may laugh at their beliefs! Why not? Are they so fragile? Are they beyond criticism? It is heartening that Western European governments have refused to cower before Muslim anger. But Australia and the U.S.A. tremble and tell their people to obey Muslim law. I’ll repeat that in case the significance escapes you. By agreeing not to laugh at Muslim beliefs, we agree to obey Muslim law! How long before the sight of naked flesh on beaches is deemed an offence to Allah and is banned as it was by the Christians not so many years ago? Not long, if our inglorious leaders continue their discreditable appeasement. And before anyone whispers the word “respect”, think about what you are being asked to respect! Among hundreds of other things: – forcing women to cover all parts of their body except face and hands. Insisting on the right of men to have dominion over women. Demanding the stoning to death of women adulterers and same-sex-oriented men. Telling young men they will go straight to heaven and be given the services of seventy virgins if they murder or die while fighting in the name of Allah…

I respect honesty, truth, compassion, kindness, justice, mercy, tolerance, egalitarianism… but I can never respect anyone who espouses indifference, cruelty, hatred, intolerance and oppression.

The greatest threat to our increasingly fragile secular democracies is the notion that all cultures, no matter how bizarre some of their practices may be, are worthy of respect and support. All cultures have their roots deep in religion. Most are oppressive in their insistence on following unchanging custom. All value the group more than the individual. Amsterdam, once the most liberal of cities, a haven of commonsense, freedom and diversity, after forty years of determined multiculturalism, is now, in many areas, a dangerous place for anyone who displeases the Muslims. Women are abused, gays are hounded and beaten, clubs are picketed, politicians assassinated… all in the name of Allah. Denmark, once the most liberal, safe, and freedom-loving country on the planet, is now experiencing fear. Ethnic/cultural/religious violence and hatred stalk the streets along with fear of terrorists, and the imposition of oppressive laws – all in the name of respect for Muslim “culture”.

Despite these and other warning signs, Australia still promotes multiculturalism over pluralism. [Pluralism respects the individual, not the group]. Must we wait until we have no freedoms left before anything is done? I suspect we will be waiting forever, because the sole concern of governments is the profitability of business. Social stability is required for that, but stability is easiest to manage, particularly in the mega-cities that now sprawl across the globe like scabrous cancers, by Totalitarian government. There’s no profit in personal liberty, justice, or tolerance – they cost far too much and waste too much time. We know the air is becoming too poisonous to breathe, the land too degraded to grow food, the water too polluted to drink… but business can still make a profit and there’s no capital in proposing a reduction in the population, because all religions insist there can never be too many humans! That suits big business because unless the population continues to expand, the world’s Economies will stop expanding!

Meanwhile, there’s not much individuals can do except prepare for the worst while demanding that our elected leaders defend the freedoms our forefathers worked so hard and suffered for. It does seem pathetic that our ancestors died for our freedoms, whereas we are prepared give up those freedoms so we can live.

Personally, I agree with Patrick Henry: Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it…! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Appendix: It is not surprising that oppression is the preferred means of control by religion. After all, the Bible and the Qu’ran are full of god’s commands to oppress. Here are a few. [You can find lots more unnerving information regarding the Bible, Qu’ran and the book of Mormon at this site: Skeptics Annotated Bible

Genesis

* 7:4 God repeats his intention to kill “every living substance … from off the face of the earth.”
* 7:21-23 God drowns everything that breathes air. From newborn babies to koala bears
* 6:7, 17Solomon carries out the deathbed instructions of his father David by having Joab murdered. God is angry. He decides to destroy all humans, beasts, creeping things, fowls, and “all flesh wherein there is breath of life.” He plans to drown them all.
* 11:16 Joab (David’s captain) spent six months killing every male in Edom.
* 15:29 Baasha kills “all of the house of Jeroboam” leaving none “to breath.” This slaughter was done “according to the word of the Lord.”
* 20:28-30 God delivers the Syrians into the Israelites hands, and 100,000 were killed in one day. Of those that escaped, 27,000 were crushed by a falling wall.
* 21:23-25 Jezebel (Ahab’s “strange” wife) “stirred up” Ahab to “work wickedness in the sight of the Lord.” To punish her, God will feed her dead body to the dogs. (He also plans to feed the city folk to the dogs and country folks to the birds.)
* 22:43, 46 Jehoshaphat “did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord” and ” exterminated the homosexuals”.
* 1:4, 17 Ahaziah was sick and sent messengers to Baalzebub to ask if he would recover. God was jealous of the attention given to his competitor and tells Ahaziah that he will die for asking the wrong god.
* 1:9-12 Elijah shows that he is “a man of God” by burning 102 men to death.
* 3:19-25 God instructs the Israelites, through the prophet Elisha, to implement a scorched earth policy on the Moabites. “Strike every fortified city and every choice city, and fell every good tree and stop all springs of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones.”
* 9:33-37 God has Jezebel thrown off a wall. Her blood is sprinkled on the wall and on the horses, by which she is trampled. Her body is eaten by dogs and all that remains of it is her hands, feet, and skull. God says that she “shall be as dung upon the face of the field.”
* 10:7-42 Jehu murders every one of Ahab’s sons and family and followers – hundreds and hundreds then did the same to the followers of Baal. And God is greatly pleased with all of Jehu’s killings, saying “because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart [Jehu murdered them all], thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.” 10:30
* 15:16 King Menahem rips up all the pregnant women in Tizzah “because they opened not to him.”
* 17:25-26 God sent lions to devour the foreigners in Samaria because “they feared not the Lord,” and even worse “they knew not the manner of the God of the land.”

The Bible says to kill your wife, your daughter, your son, your brother, your friend, etc… if they worship other gods. (Deu 13:6-10 NRSV) If anyone secretly entices you-even if it is your brother, your father’s son or your mother’s son, or your own son or daughter, or the wife you embrace, or your most intimate friend – saying, “Let us go worship other gods,” whom neither you nor your ancestors have known, any of the gods of the peoples that are around you, whether near you or far away from you, from one end of the earth to the other, you must not yield to or heed any such persons. Show them no pity or compassion and do not shield them. But you shall surely kill them; your own hand shall be first against them to execute them, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Stone them to death for trying to turn you away from the LORD your God, …

(Prov 23:13 NRSV) Do not withhold discipline from your children; if you beat them with a rod, they will not die. The bible says that beating people and inflicting wounds is good for them. (Prov 20:30 NRSV) Blows that wound cleanse away evil; beatings make clean the innermost parts. (Exo 20:5 NRSV) You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me.”

The Qu’ran is no better…

1. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers. 2:89
2. Disbelievers will be burned with fire. 2:39, 2:90
3. Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers. 2:98
4. Only evil people are disbelievers. 2:99
5. Those who joke about Allah’s revelations will go to hell. Theirs will be an awful doom. 45:9-10
6. Marry of the women two, or three, or four. 4:3
7. Males are to inherit twice that of females. 4:11
8. Lewd women are to be confined to their houses until death. 4:15
9. You may not forcibly inherit women, unless they are flagrantly lewd. 4:19
10. Instructions for exchanging wives 4:20
11. Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women.
12. Don’t pray if you are drunk, dirty, or have touched a woman lately. 4:43
13. Women are feeble and are unable to devise a plan. 4:98
14. When it’s time to pray and you have just used the toilet or touched a woman, be sure to wash up. If you can’t find any water, just rub some dirt on yourself. 5:6
15. A husband can accuse his wife of adultery with only one witness. 24:6
16. Believing women must lower their gaze and be modest, cover themselves with veils, and not reveal themselves except to their husbands, relatives, children, and slaves. 24:31
17. Allah will reward faithful Muslims after they die with “fair ones with wide, lovely eyes.” 44:54
18. If a man has sex with another man, kill them both. 20:13

Conflict between science, religion lies in our brains

Date: March 23, 2016

Source: Case Western Reserve University

Summary: The conflict between science and religion may have its origins in the structure of our brains. To believe in a supernatural god or universal spirit, people appear to suppress the brain network used for analytical thinking and engage the empathetic network. When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite.

The conflict between science and religion may have its origins in the structure of our brains, researchers at Case Western Reserve University and Babson College have found.

Clashes between the use of faith vs. scientific evidence to explain the world around us dates back centuries and is perhaps most visible today in the arguments between evolution and creationism.

To believe in a supernatural god or universal spirit, people appear to suppress the brain network used for analytical thinking and engage the empathetic network, the scientists say. When thinking analytically about the physical world, people appear to do the opposite.

"When there's a question of faith, from the analytic point of view, it may seem absurd," said Tony Jack, who led the research. "But, from what we understand about the brain, the leap of faith to belief in the supernatural amounts to pushing aside the critical/analytical way of thinking to help us achieve greater social and emotional insight."

Jack is an associate professor of philosophy at Case Western Reserve and research director of the university's Inamori International Center of Ethics and Excellence, which helped sponsor the research.

"A stream of research in cognitive psychology has shown and claims that people who have faith (i.e., are religious or spiritual) are not as smart as others. They actually might claim they are less intelligent.," said Richard Boyatzis, distinguished university professor and professor of organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve, and a member of Jack's team.

"Our studies confirmed that statistical relationship, but at the same time showed that people with faith are more prosocial and empathic," he said.

In a series of eight experiments, the researchers found the more empathetic the person, the more likely he or she is religious.

That finding offers a new explanation for past research showing women tend to hold more religious or spiritual worldviews than men. The gap may be because women have a stronger tendency toward empathetic concern than men.

Atheists, the researchers found, are most closely aligned with psychopaths--not killers, but the vast majority of psychopaths classified as such due to their lack of empathy for others.

The new study is published in the online journal PLOS ONE. The other authors are Jared Friedman, a research assistant and recent graduate in Philosophy and Cognitive Science who will begin his PhD in organizational behavior at Case Western Reserve in the fall, and Scott Taylor, assistant professor of organizational behavior at Babson College.

Brain structure

The research is based on the hypothesis that the human brain has two opposing domains in constant tension. In earlier research, Jack 's Brain, Mind & Consciousness lab used functional magnetic resonance imaging to show the brain has an analytical network of neurons that enables us to think critically and a social network that enables us to empathize. When presented with a physics problem or ethical dilemma, a healthy brain fires up the appropriate network while suppressing the other.

"Because of the tension between networks, pushing aside a naturalistic world view enables you to delve deeper into the social/emotional side," Jack explained. "And that may be the key to why beliefs in the supernatural exist throughout the history of cultures. It appeals to an essentially nonmaterial way of understanding the world and our place in it."

Friedman said, "Having empathy doesn't mean you necessarily have anti-scientific beliefs. Instead, our results suggest that if we only emphasize analytic reasoning and scientific beliefs, as the New Atheist movement suggests, then we are compromising our ability to cultivate a different type of thinking, namely social/moral insight."

"These findings," Friedman continued, "are consistent with the philosophical view, espoused by (Immanuel) Kant, according to which there are two distinct types of truth: empirical and moral."

Experiments and results

The researchers examined the relationship between belief in God or a universal spirit with measures of analytic thinking and moral concern in eight different experiments, each involving 159 to 527 adults. Consistently through all eight, the more religious the person, the more moral concern they showed. But no cause and effect was established.

They found that both spiritual belief and empathic concern were positively associated with frequency of prayer, meditations and other spiritual or religious practices, but neither were predicted by church dinners or other social contact associated with religious affiliation.

While others theorize that mentalizing--interpreting human behavior in terms of intentional mental states such as needs, desires or purposes--has a positive association with belief, the researchers found none.

Like other studies, these experiments showed that analytic thinking discourages acceptance of spiritual or religious beliefs. But the statistical analysis of data pooled from all eight experiments indicates empathy is more important to religious belief than analytic thinking is for disbelief.

So why can the conflict between science and religion become so strong?

"Because the networks suppress each other, they may create two extremes," Boyatzis said. "Recognizing that this is how the brain operates, maybe we can create more reason and balance in the national conversations involving science and religion."

Using both networks

The researchers say humans are built to engage and explore using both networks.

"Far from always conflicting with science, under the right circumstances religious belief may positively promote scientific creativity and insight," Jack said. "Many of history's most famous scientists were spiritual or religious. Those noted individuals were intellectually sophisticated enough to see that there is no need for religion and science to come into conflict."

They refer to Baruch Aba Shalev's book 100 years of Nobel Prizes, which found that, from 1901 to 2000, 654 Nobel laureates, or nearly 90 percent, belonged to one of 28 religions. The remaining 10.5 percent were atheists, agnostics or freethinkers.

"You can be religious and be a very good scientist," Jack said.

The researchers agree with the New Atheists that suspension of analytical thinking--at the wrong time--can be dangerous, and point to the historical use of religious differences to persecute or fight wars.

"Although it is simply a distortion of history to pin all conflict on religion," Jack said. "Non-religious political movements, such as fascism and communism, and quasi-scientific movements, such as eugenics, have also done great harm."

The researchers suggest, however, that taking a carefully considered leap of religious faith appears be an effective route to promoting emotional insight. Theirs and other studies find that, overall, religious belief is associated with greater compassion, greater social inclusiveness and greater motivation to engage in pro-social actions.

Jack said the conflict can be avoided by remembering simple rules: "Religion has no place telling us about the physical structure of the world; that's the business of science. Science should inform our ethical reasoning, but it cannot determine what is ethical or tell us how we should construct meaning and purpose in our lives."

To dig deeper into belief, the researchers are planning studies to learn if individuals who increase their empathy then increase their religious or spiritual belief, or vice versa.

DeYtH Banger - Notes

Note: God is created to scare the small children... to create fear upon younger generation and old fucks to think that they are doing something in this world.

Note: I know it's kinda of cliche... but I am going to work on a book which is going to explain why I stopped beliving or let's say "I lost my belief in god..."...
...

It happen when people started talking to me

about

Spirtual things like:

1) The people which are going to be around you are a mirror of yourself.
2) Black is Satanic Colour
3) Law of Attraction: You think about it, you feel it... you get it
4) Positive Mindsets

- Oh god and bullshits like this put me on this place on which I am now... an atheist thinker.

Note: Which in other words means that people can't have free will...

The second thing which I want to look is

2) We have soul

- Okay, what type of soul can be hold in the body... when theoritically it's not possible such thing to stay in a physical form... - THe whole thing is shaking... I mean the whole bible shit... is build upon shit and few strong arguments, doubts and questions can kill this beast....

...

Watch:

The Unbelivers (2013)
Root of All Evil (2006)

First I want to say:

1) There isn't Free Will - (Sam Harris) - Explains it very well

THE ILLUSION OF FREE WILL

I briefly discussed the illusion of free will in both The End of Faith and The Moral Landscape. I have since received hundreds of questions and comments from readers and learned just where the sticking points were in my original arguments. I am happy to now offer my final thoughts on the subject in the form of a short book, Free Will, that can be read in a single sitting.

The question of free will touches nearly everything we care about. Morality, law, politics, religion, public policy, intimate relationships, feelings of guilt and personal accomplishment—most of what is distinctly human about our lives seems to depend upon our viewing one another as autonomous persons, capable of free choice. If the scientific community were to declare free will an illusion, it would precipitate a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution. Without free will, sinners and criminals would be nothing more than poorly calibrated clockwork, and any conception of justice that emphasized punishing them (rather than deterring, rehabilitating, or merely containing them) would appear utterly incongruous. And those of us who work hard and follow the rules would not “deserve” our success in any deep sense. It is not an accident that most people find these conclusions abhorrent. The stakes are high.

In the early morning of July 23, 2007, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, two career criminals, arrived at the home of Dr. William and Jennifer Petit in Cheshire, a quiet town in central Connecticut. They found Dr. Petit asleep on a sofa in the sunroom. According to his taped confession, Komisarjevsky stood over the sleeping man for some minutes, hesitating, before striking him in the head with a baseball bat. He claimed that his victim’s screams then triggered something within him, and he bludgeoned Petit with all his strength until he fell silent.

The two then bound Petit’s hands and feet and went upstairs to search the rest of the house. They discovered Jennifer Petit and her daughters—Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11—still asleep. They woke all three and immediately tied them to their beds.

At 7:00 a.m., Hayes went to a gas station and bought four gallons of gasoline. At 9:30, he drove Jennifer Petit to her bank to withdraw $15,000 in cash. The conversation between Jennifer and the bank teller suggests that she was unaware of her husband’s injuries and believed that her captors would release her family unharmed.

While Hayes and the girls’ mother were away, Komisarjevsky amused himself by taking naked photos of Michaela with his cell phone and masturbating on her. When Hayes returned with Jennifer, the two men divided up the money and briefly considered what they should do. They decided that Hayes should take Jennifer into the living room and rape her—which he did. He then strangled her, to the apparent surprise of his partner.

At this point, the two men noticed that William Petit had slipped his bonds and escaped. They began to panic. They quickly doused the house with gasoline and set it on fire. When asked by the police why he hadn’t untied the two girls from their beds before lighting the blaze, Komisarjevsky said, “It just didn’t cross my mind.” The girls died of smoke inhalation. William Petit was the only survivor of the attack.

Upon hearing about crimes of this kind, most of us naturally feel that men like Hayes and Komisarjevsky should be held morally responsible for their actions. Had we been close to the Petit family, many of us would feel entirely justified in killing these monsters with our own hands. Do we care that Hayes has since shown signs of remorse and has attempted suicide? Not really. What about the fact that Komisarjevsky was repeatedly raped as a child? According to his journals, for as long as he can remember, he has known that he was “different” from other people, psychologically damaged, and capable of great coldness. He also claims to have been stunned by his own behavior in the Petit home: He was a career burglar, not a murderer, and he had not consciously intended to kill anyone. Such details might begin to give us pause.

Whether criminals like Hayes and Komisarjevsky can be trusted to honestly report their feelings and intentions is not the point: Whatever their conscious motives, these men cannot know why they are as they are. Nor can we account for why we are not like them. As sickening as I find their behavior, I have to admit that if I were to trade places with one of these men, atom for atom, I would be him: There is no extra part of me that could decide to see the world differently or to resist the impulse to victimize other people. Even if you believe that every human being harbors an immortal soul, the problem of responsibility remains: I cannot take credit for the fact that I do not have the soul of a psychopath. If I had truly been in Komisarjevsky’s shoes on July 23, 2007—that is, if I had his genes and life experience and an identical brain (or soul) in an identical state—I would have acted exactly as he did. There is simply no intellectually respectable position from which to deny this. The role of luck, therefore, appears decisive.

Of course, if we learned that both these men had been suffering from brain tumors that explained their violent behavior, our moral intuitions would shift dramatically. But a neurological disorder appears to be just a special case of physical events giving rise to thoughts and actions. Understanding the neurophysiology of the brain, therefore, would seem to be as exculpatory as finding a tumor in it.

How can we make sense of our lives, and hold people accountable for their choices, given the unconscious origins of our conscious minds?

Brilliant and witty—and never less than incisive—Free Will shows that Sam Harris can say more in 13,000 words than most people do in 100,000.

Oliver Sacks

In this elegant and provocative book, Sam Harris demonstrates—with great intellectual ferocity and panache—that free will is an inherently flawed and incoherent concept, even in subjective terms. If he is right, the book will radically change the way we view ourselves as human beings.

V.S. Ramachandran, Director of the Center for Brain and Cognition, UCSD, and author of The Tell-Tale Brain.

Free will is an illusion so convincing that people simply refuse to believe that we don’t have it. In Free Will, Sam Harris combines neuroscience and psychology to lay this illusion to rest at last. Like all of Harris’s books, this one will not only unsettle you but make you think deeply. Read it: you have no choice.

Jerry A. Coyne, Professor of Ecology and Evolution at The University of Chicago, and author of Why Evolution is True.

Many say that believing that there is no free will is impossible—or, if possible, will cause nihilism and despair. In this feisty and personal essay, Harris offers himself as an example of a heart made less self-absorbed, and more morally sensitive and creative, because this particular wicked witch is dead.

Owen Flanagan, Professor of Philosophy, Duke University, and author of The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in the Material World.

If you believe in free will, or know someone who does, here is the perfect antidote. In this smart, engaging, and extremely readable little book, Sam Harris argues that free will doesn’t exist, that we’re better off knowing that it doesn’t exist, and that—once we think about it in the right way—we can appreciate from our own experience that it doesn’t exist. This is a delightful discussion by one of the sharpest scholars around.

Paul Bloom, Professor of Psychology, Yale University, and author of How Pleasure Works.

A Refute To Morality From God

Discussion by: scottcgold

Watching various debates between atheists and the religious I have noticed, as I am sure many others have, that the question of morality always wants to rear it’s head as an argument against atheism. While it seems obvious to any atheist that religion is not a requirement for morality I have yet to hear an atheist give a convincing answer to the theist about it’s origin, not that it is a requirement for our position as the burden of proof rests on the theist, however, if we wish to debate then it is our duty to make arguments not only convincing to ourselves but to those opposed to us as well. This is my humble attempt to refute the theistic claim.

I will not spend time discussing the argument that morality does or does not come from religion itself. While I do agree that it is extremely valid to point to the scriptures as immoral documents and therefore not an acceptable basis for morality especially when quoting the words or actions of the deity himself/herself, it is all to easy for any theist, William Craig for example, to throw off the religious texts and say that morality is not written in pages but in ourselves by God. This also allows him to sidestep any ridiculous notion that an atheist cannot be moral because they are not religious. Craig says that of course atheists can be moral because they bear the divine spark that God has given to all men/women.

Hitchens brilliantly devised a wager asking anyone to present him with a moral action that a theist could perform but that an atheist could not. He also inversely asked of an immoral action that could only be undertaken by a religious person. This, to great effect, fleshed out Weinberg’s claim that“Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” However, this does not necessarily refute the theist claim that morality comes from God within us as it side steps the necessity of religious dogma.

Dawkins and others have argued the evolutionary reasons for morality which, not that they are invalid, seem to disappoint the theist because they automatically see it as a rebuff to their human dignity. They might say, “Morality is what separates us from the animals because it is a product of the soul or God within man.”

We will never get the theist, at least not yet, to admit that morality is a process of genetics and deterministic chemicals operating within the brain and making our choices for us; and while the atheist may be willing to accept morality as a process of evolution and determinism there is still something unsettling to a great many atheists about the notion of free will bing illusory.

Theists also say that science has nothing to offer to the humanities such as music, painting and other arts. I tend to agree with this and would also venture to throw morality into this pile as well. It is entirely possible that science may one day discover an absolute morality and describe it to us but this would be as difficult as

finding the singular equation that can illustrate the workings of the entire universe. Mathematics while the best suited of our many languages to describe the universe may turn out to be fatally imperfect in doing so or we may keep refining the language of mathematics ever closer to the limit of perfection. Suffice to say that theists, and I tend to agree, feel that science is a different human endeavor that only has secondary impacts on morality but no real incite as to its origins or intricate workings (at least, not yet).

At this time I would like to present a definition of humanities as ‘those branches of knowledge, such as philosophy, literature, and art, that are concerned with human thought and culture; the liberal arts.’ Also, I would like to now explain why, above, I have lumped morality in with the humanities. Morality like mathematics can have effects in the physical world. However, unlike mathematics which is the language of the physical world and therefore tethered inescapably to it. Morality is a humanity that operates below (or above) language. We can feel morality without describing it in words and we can endlessly hypothesize moral situations without throwing the physical world out the window. To illustrate, many people hypothesize the necessary moral action that needs to be taken to stop an abortion because of metaphysical and physical assumptions that can be examined independently. In deciding whether we are for or against an abortion at a given moment we can make arguments about a soul or argue, ‘does the baby feel pain?’ or both simultaneously. In contrast, we could hypothesize about what changes we would need to make to a constant if gravity operated in reverse or if light traveled half speed but none of the equations change if we decide chemical weapons are good or bad.

Morality is an aesthetic. Theists like Craig may want to believe in an absolute morality and this is fine so far as to say that we may one day discover an agreed upon absolute aesthetic in music and painting. However, even Craig admits that we have made “moral improvements’ although he involves himself in quite the mental contortion to explain why morality has always operated at the absolute while at the same time improving.

Theists believe that they are always operating at the moral absolute. This is necessary for their dogma. They therefore claim that God is necessary for morality. For the theist, to admit that morality is relative or evolving towards an absolute perfection while their God operates beyond the physical world and time is to admit that God is inconsistent and imperfect. The theists, like Craig, then mince words and say we have moral improvement but we would not know what absolute we are striving toward unless God was present in us and guiding us.

This is where I come to the point of this essay. When a theist asks how can we have an absolute morality without God we must say that it serves a purpose. Morality serves the desire of a species living together in close proximity. We do not need a perfect version of morality to meet the societal want. Any version of it is better than no version at all. When human beings built the first bridges they did not have an image of the Golden Gate Bridge to work toward, just as the Wright brothers

first airplane was not a failure to build the Concord. Morality exists because there is a desire for it to exist. It increases the quality of life. We see this throughout human history. As morality reaches higher and higher standards and these standards become accepted we in turn make higher demands of our moral code. We then begin to see that morality is a process of positive feedback. Just as building the first bridge meant not having to walk as far and freed time for us to pursue desires instead of needs, developing moral codes allowed us to have less fear of others within society which allows us more time to think about what we want instead of guarding against every stranger we encounter. We also can now see that as communication, travel and other technologies are at the beginnings of creating a global society, morality is once again evolving, as we demand more from it. Now that we have closer contacts with other countries, nationalism has become xenophobia and righteous persecution towards LGBT has become homophobia. Keep in mind that religious texts have remained the same for these changes and many more.

Morality, like any other humanity pleased an aesthetic and evolved, as we demanded more from it. As Mozart was not content to forever bang on drums as cavemen did but instead endeavored to create something ever more complex, beautiful and pleasing so does humanity endlessly strive to throw off Bronze Age morality and create a world more beautiful and pleasing for ALL its inhabitants.

P.S.: I am not fucked up... I am just going rational...

One Hundred Above-board Questions about God

by JEFF MOORE

Questioning the ideas of God is a useful way to make people curious about the inconsistencies in religions. So, I have created these 100 above-board questions about God from the theological, philosophical, ethical, natural, scriptural, and evolutionarily standpoint. While it is very much obvious that no god will descend to the earth to answer all these questions, since there is no such thing as god, and no religious person will be able to provide any precise and unequivocal answer to these questions, I still am addressing these questions so that atheists and freethinkers can use these in a debate or conversation with the theists. So, I think that bookmarking this article could come in handy in the future.

The Questions:

If there is a God, why is there no compelling evidence for his existence?
Who is the creator of God?
How did God use to exist without space and time or before the Big Bang event?
How did God become full of magic and strength and supremacy without any complex phase of evolution of his own?
What is the gender of God?
If God has gender, what gave him gender?
If God has no gender, what rendered him genderless?
If God has no gender, why do his followers address him as a male?
Why is God constantly testing humans if he knows everything already?
How do incidents go out of God’s control if he is omnipotent and well aware of everything that has happened and will happen?
Why are there so many flaws in God’s creation if he is omnipotent?
How can God take 6 days to create the whole universe while he is omnipotent?
Why does God feel so insecure over what puny humans do if he is omnipotent?
Why does God become angry and jealous if he is only good?
If God is everywhere, why cannot his presence be measured?
How can God be everywhere if he is on the throne in the seventh heaven or at somewhere in the heavens?
How can God know who is where and doing what if he is not everywhere?
Does God stare at the people when they have sex if he is always watching?
How will God exist forever if everything has an end?
If God has no image, how are we supposed to imagine him?
How can God be shapeless and in the same time sit on a throne or give reward with his own hands?
If God is everywhere or on a throne in heaven, why do we have to worship a black box or a cross?
Why are most of the God’s followers with low IQ level?
Why does God want to kill the people who question him while he can question everything?
Why does God have the similar characteristics like that of a tyrant?
Why do we find, on regular basis, the less necessity of the God-of-the-gaps arguments and more and more necessity of the god-less theories to explain nature?
If evolution theory is wrong, then why did God put the vestiges of evolution in human body and DNA?
Why did God put a great many dinosaurs on the planet and yet did not mention them in any of the scriptures?
Why, in the scriptures, was God obsessed with only the sun and the moon while he created billions and billions of other stars and satellites?
Why does God only bother about humans in the earth while there are billions and billions of other planets which might be teeming with lives and other issues?
If we are in a test of God and the earth is a test-place, then why is the test-place so disgusting and dangerous, e.g. - it is full of diseases, famine, disasters, wild animals, and germs?
Why do we have to survive through killing animals if God loves animals?
How will God punish the other animals who commit crimes like murder, rape, theft etc.?
Why did God create animals like pig, dog etc. if he hates them?
Why did humans use to act like other animals before civilization if there is a God?
Why did God start the human race out of incest and then make incest illegal?
What will happen to the native Indians who never heard of the “loving” God?
If the native Indians will go to heaven because they did not hear about God, then will not they just be given a pass without any test on the planet?
Why did God create millions of species who are extinct today in the first place if he wanted to make them extinct?
If evolution theory is wrong, then why has God kept so much evidence for that theory?
Why do God’s scriptures have serious scientific and logical fallacies?
Why do God’s scriptures need human explanation while he said that the scriptures are precise and easily understandable?
Why did none of the God’s scriptures clearly say that the earth moves around the sun when it tried to explain the basic astronomy in detail?
Why does God, in the scriptures, sound like nothing but a self-centered narcissist?
Why did God keep his message written on the papers some of which are lost or eaten by goats while he could easily send the messages in a PDF format through a pen drive?
If everything in the universe must need a prime mover and God is a part of the universe, then what does move him?
If God created everything, why do we see virtual particles popping in and out without any creator?
If everything needs a reason to exist, what is God’s reason to exist?
If that some people talk to God is an evidence of his existence, then is some schizophrenic person talks to his pet dragon an evidence that the pet dragon exists?
If we need God to be good, whom does God need to be good?
Why do almost all of the scientists doubt the existence of God if science proves the existence of God?
If good cannot exist without bad, then how can God be only good?
Why does God intervene in the daily affairs of humans if he has given them the free will to test them?
Why did God forbid Adam to eat the Apple while he had already known that Adam would have eaten?
Why didn't God stop the serpent or devil instead of forbidding Adam to eat the Fruit of Knowledge?
Will humans be able to live in the heaven peacefully forever with God, or something will become messy again like the Adam and Eve and serpent story?
Why did God need a rib to create Eve?
Didn't God know that the creation of Adam would make a lot and lot of people to suffer?
If God tests humans by giving them free will, why doesn’t he do the same with the angels?
Why did God choose particular people as his chosen people and did not test them?
Why did not God make me his chosen one?
Why will God’s chosen people be rewarded because only he chose them and not because they earned the position?
Why does not prayer to God work at all?
Why do the people of the 21st century lead a much more healthy and happy life than people before the 21st century if God cares for all the humans of all the ages?
Why does God give some people more time than the others in his test, for example- someone dies at the age of 30 and another one dies at the age of 90?
Why is God jealous and angry over the other "gods" if they do not exist?
Why does God test humans by afflicting them through diseases and disasters while this is already a test of whether we praise him or Satan even though he is not visible?
How does God blame humans for their actions while he predestined everything for them?
How would God respond to the fact that many people commit crime because of their psychological and environmental predispositions and not according to their own will?
Why does the first person in the planet have to wait for millions of years and the last person have to wait for only a few minutes for the judgment day of God?
How are humans filled with flaws if they are the best creatures of God?
If Satan is bad and God is his creator, doesn't it make him a bad creator or the creator of evil?
Why did not God destroy Satan and save humans from committing sin?
What is the fault of humans if they always commit evil things because Satan magically makes them to do so?
If God is good and Satan is bad, then why do people kill in the name of God but not in the name of Satan?
What if God is actually Satan in disguise?
What does God do when children die of starvation?
How can God watch a person gets raped or murdered and not do anything?
Why does God call humans his slave and make slavery sounds natural?
Why did God think slavery is permissible?
Why were humans able to abolish slavery while God could not?
Why does God love revenge and hatred more than mercy and love?
Why does God think that destroying an entire nation is a solution while he could just stop humans from committing any sort of wrongdoing in the first place?
How did God feel like when he destroyed every single life on the earth by drowning?
Why will God burn humans forever while he could burn them finitely?
If humans think torturing others is bad no matter what, how does God, being an omniscient and benevolent, think it is right?
Why does God take human life by killing them horribly? For example- through crushing under a vehicle?
How will God be burning trillions of humans in hell forever?
How can a pedophilic, sexist, and perverted warmonger be God’s most favorite person and friend?
How can a loving God create humans as a fuel of hellfire?
Why did God make humans fallible even though he knew that their fallibility would lead them astray?
Why do animals suffer in the nature if suffering is only to test humans’ faith in God?
Why do most of the people of God lead an unhappy and unhealthy life?
Why does God not talk to women?
Why does God not make women as his chosen one?
Why did God make women the victim of men’s lust?
Why do women have to endure unbearable pain while giving birth when God could just make the process of giving birth painless?
How can a “loving” God lead humans astray or blind them by sealing their mind?
Why did God promise to destroy the planet but did not promise to save the planet?
The big one: We are on this planet for at least 200,000 years and we are suffering and suffering only with a little bit of momentary happiness. Why does not the dear God just say -- “that’s it! There are now trillions of people who would live in my hell according to my rules. I have had enough of it. I will not let any of my other creatures to get inside of the hell or to suffer. I will reveal myself and destroy Satan for good to save my loving creatures from sufferings and doubts”?

DeYtH Banger - Notes (Part 2)

Note: Why do we believe in God?
...

When his behavior the way it's getting reflected on this world is... like a less empathic psychopath.

Note: So here is the thing

1) Free Will can't be given
2) I won't believe in such a Monster

The Passion of the Atheist - Misunderstood Anger

Misunderstood Anger

A common remark from theists is that atheists are angry at god. Many times the claim is made that atheism is merely an act of rebellion against god and that atheism is merely a phase that some people go through. Of course, this notion is akin to saying that refusing to participate in Christmas is an act of rebellion against Santa Claus. There is however, often an element of anger in the atheist position and it deserves to be addressed.

For the most part these angry atheists, such as myself, are also anti-theists. And as we like to say, we aren't angry at god we just really dislike his fanclub. You see, for most of us the idea of god in and of itself isn't really a problem. I can't say I've ever had an agnostic deist try to push their idea of god on me and for the most part they tend to be open to adopting new philosophy and aren't rigid or doctrinal in their thinking. So it comes down to an anger at the religion itself. More importantly and specifically, the doctrines and dogmas of these various religions.

I'm not angry at Jesus or god or even Christians as individuals, but I most certainly have an axe to grind with the ideology and dogma of Christianity. The same goes for Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and all the rest. Within the doctrines and dogma of these various religions are the potential justifications for the most depraved ideas of mankind. Racism, classism, sexism, and many other issues are all offered potential justification within these various doctrines and dogmas. I would dare say that these things should make any person who is a champion of justice and equality a bit upset, because where ideas such as racism, sexism and the like flourish, ideas like justice and equality die.

So when we look at why many atheists are angry and what we're angry about, it usually has absolutely nothing to do with just the simple idea of god. It has to do with the supposed acts of specific gods, and with the potential justification for depravity offered by a given religious doctrine. I'm not angry at god, because it is quite evident that the gods offered by these religions aren't actually real, but I am angry about the fact that people not only believe that gods who commit acts like mass genocide are in fact real, but that they worship these gods as if they are righteous in committing such acts. To me, worshipping such a god, whether it's real or not, is tantamount to worshipping Adolf Hitler, and there is no logical reason for me to show respect to such a notion.

In the same respect, it angers me greatly when believers point to these acts supposedly perpetrated by their gods or by their prophets as being just, and therefore use them as a justification for committing these same heinous crimes themselves. Groups such as ISIS can literally point to verses in the Qur'an and Hadith that support their terroristic actions as being justified because the prophet Muhammad committed those same acts and the Qur'an teaches that Muhammad is the shining example of how to be a "true Muslim". The same goes with the bible and how Christian fundamentalists use specific doctrine to justify their own bigotry and hatred of certain groups such as homosexuals.

So what we need to understand is that almost no one is actually angry at god, and once you understand what it is we're actually angry about, that such anger is wholly justified. Almost no one would tell you that you're wrong in being angry about the Holocaust, and yet, when you tell someone that the glorification of genocide that comes from proclaiming such acts as the supposed great flood as being righteous is in fact perverse, they get defensive and want to call you hateful and angry. Of course such a glorification makes me angry, because it tells me that your perception of ethics is skewed so badly that you don't understand ethics at all. No matter who commits an act of genocide, even if it's an imaginary invention from the minds of long dead goat herders, the act of genocide is still a deplorable and unethical action. If Hitler was not justified in his actions simply by being the leader of Germany, then the god of the bible is not justified in supposedly committing mass genocide on multiple occasions simply because he's god and supposed leader of the universe.

This sort of double standard logic by believers that god is somehow free of any obligations to act in an ethical and just manner, is absolutely infuriating for those like myself. In the end, it becomes nothing more than an appeal to authority fallacy that poses the notion that god's supposed authority over mankind disabuses god of the obligation to act in an ethical manner. In all reality it's like saying that god gets to set the standards, but isn't obligated to meet those standards himself. This is the very epitome of despotism and tyranny, and people have fought tooth and nail against this when they encounter other people acting this way, such as kings and other despotic leaders, all while heralding a god who acts the exact same way as being righteous and just.

The irony is so thick that it is palpable.

When we really examine this objectively, we see that it makes no sense for us to be angry at men such as Hitler while worshipping his mirror image in the form of a despotic and tyrannical god offered by religion. It is absolute hypocrisy and the only reason people do this is because they want justification for their own depravity. It's as the saying goes; there is a reason your god hates all the things you hate and agrees with all the things you agree with, because in reality that god is simply a reflection of yourself. For those who lean towards true justice and equality, their god also leans that way. For those who lean towards depravity, their god is equally depraved. And no matter which side you lean towards, you can find doctrine and scripture that backs up your position, although no matter which position you lean towards you'll have to ignore all the scripture which disputes your position.

But we must ask if this emotional position of anger at these things is in any way a justification for a position of disbelief, and I for one believe it is. If it angers you that such a god should be worshipped by so many, and that such a god and such a god's actions be heralded by so many, that is surely a valid reason to reject the notion totally, and even to argue against it. If our emotions and conscience tells us that these acts are unethical, no matter who you are or what supposed position of authority you hold, then we most certainly should reject such ideas. When the believer claims their god to be benevolent, we have every right to point out that such a notion is false and that such gods are merely the invention of mankind to justify their own depravity.

P.S.: It's kinda fun... seeing debates around religion and there are even few channels who go around such extends in this topics... but so far to be honest about the whole argument... it doesn't exist...

First of all God doesn't exist
Second of all... "The belivers" don't have any strong arguments to proof that god does it exist

Thrid Atheists are winning...

It’s Not Terrorism, Its Religion

Itâs Not Terrorism, Its Religion

I was down in Jakarta when the 13 May 2018 church suicide bombings in Surabaya took place, followed by similar attacks the next day on police stations. These were cases of parents and children, young children, strapping explosives to themselves and attempting to kill as many people as possible. The perpetrators may have been returnees from the conflict in Syria or Iraq, and they may have been part of a local fundamentalist group. But all that, for me, is irrelevant.

For me, there is only a single question: what would it take for a parent to do that with their child?

I am a parent, with 2 kids who are both adults now. I can imagine, with a sense of horror, conditions that could exist where I would help them to take their own lives. In the case of painful, untreatable illness; if faced with the prospect of brutal death or torture; and I would offer it as an option if they were faced with being enslaved, but I can’t think of any others.

But these parents, whom I am sure dearly loved their children, felt that the best way to treat them was to ensure their place in an everlasting paradise. Where they would be guaranteed to never be sick, or hungry, or unhappy ever again. Just follow what is in the holy book, as interpreted by your religious leaders, and you are guaranteed a place in paradise.

The Hebrews didn’t have a concept of paradise in their original religion, except for YHWH’s heavenly court, for angels and such. So there is no description of it. Also, no one seemed to understand that Jesus was really YHWH too, otherwise I am sure someone would have asked him what it was like up there in heaven. If they had, or if the Hebrews had thought of it, I am sure they would have come up with a description not far removed from that which is in the Quran. Its of a garden with plenty of water (no mention of wifi, jet skis, or Thai cuisine, however) and is the sort of thing that a poor people in an arid setting would aspire to and think of as divine.

I remember years ago, I was with a poor family in the Philippines, whose son had been very ill. I had given him some books; he must have been about 9 years old. I told him he’d been very brave, and he answered me that he could go to heaven, but he didn’t want to go just yet. I asked him what heaven would be like. For him, it was fresh fruit every day, and as much rice as he wanted, and a TV that worked all the time (his family had no electricity). He also wanted to see his little sister, who had been killed two years before in a road accident. Many years later, I tried to find him, but local developers had claimed the area his village was in, and all the people had all been moved out years before.

So, heaven is what the author can imagine at the time he or she is composing their “vision”. For Muslims, Jannah (heaven), is a garden with many flowing rivers (Quran 2:25, 3:133, 9:72, and 13:25-26), you get a throne like a king with cups at hand, and carpets and pillows (Quran 36:56-57, 52:20, and 88:10-16), and as with any people who have faced times of hunger and starvation there will be plenty of the best food (Quran 69:24). I am skipping the parts about wealth, carnal pleasures, and wine, none of which would sound very good to a child. But being happy, safe, comfortable, and with plenty to eat of your favourite foods would have been heaven enough in those days, and even today for a large number of people.

And heaven in all Western religions is eternal. Hindus and Buddhists (those that have heavens and hells) and some Chinese religions view heaven more as a nice place to be rewarded while on the way to enlightenment – which is oblivion. You did a good job, so take a day off, and then in the next life continue the struggle for final enlightenment or union with the ineffable.

But an eternal heaven? Eternity is not the same as infinity, as you can have many eternities within an infinity. An eternity is a measure of time only, so conceivably there can be many different time cycles within an infinity of space/time. But let’s leave that issue for the physicists, mathematicians and jobless philosophers.

In any sense that we humans can appreciate, our life span when compared to eternity is nothing. It’s not a dust mote on the table top of existence. Parents are always concerned about their children’s future, so if their children will exist into the future for eternity, then forget worrying about college admission scores, all you need to be concerned about is the change for heaven, especially if there is the added disincentive of hell.

Most people really don’t believe in their religion at that level, however. Most children spend more time in classrooms than in churches, mosques or temples, and this is true in most places to a significant degree. It’s just like getting sick. People may believe in god and miracles, but they don’t just pray to get healed, they go to the doctor. The ones that don’t, well, just think of it as the magical hand of natural selection at work.

Religions know that this is a dangerous thing, as if everyone were to be able to go to heaven upon death, because of sincere beliefs, then the religion would be in danger of losing adherents (the people who pay for the temples and the head priests’ lifestyles). Thus, most religions have an admonition against suicide (although some, like Jainism, see self-denial leading to death as the ultimate step in religiosity – but very few follow that course, and when they do it’s usually later in life).

Religions want to keep their believers alive, so you are told to wait for heaven. That ensures that the religion will benefit from its believers’ life-long support and vassalage. But there is one case that is an exception, and it’s been indoctrinated into every major religion I know of, except Buddhism: the idea of the martyr.

In addition to making sacrifices and donations, building monuments, and following orders, religions also occasionally need people to die. And because the institution of monarchy1 is a facet of religion, many of the loyalties that are claimed by religion are also claimed by the State. This can be overt, as when the Roman Catholic Church used to promise paradise for soldiers who go on crusading campaign, or pernicious as when the rebel leaders in Masada convinced their followers to die rather than lose to the Romans (or they were killed by the zealots among them – there is of course no way to tell), or passive as when the holy Icons were carried before the Orthodox armies of Russia and Byzantium.

But the idea is always the same, however expressed. Do work for the god, and then you get to go to heaven when you die. And if heaven lasts for eternity, then you would be foolish not to take up such an amazing offer.

Imagine a similar offer here in our real world. A company says that if you work for them for one day, a single 8-hour shift with an hour for lunch, they will pay you every day for the rest of your life. And they will pay you far more than you make now, indeed it will be enough for you to enjoy whatever pleasures you like.2 Sounds like a good offer to me. But most people would say its too good to be true. I’ve always wondered why they don’t say the same thing about religions that promise an eternal heaven?

And it doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor, because heaven will always be better. I suppose that this works because some of the richest people I’ve ever met have also been the most greedy and venal. Promise them a way to get more, and if it doesn’t cost them much, they will be all for it.

So, if you are a good parent, and you love your kids, and someone told you that there is way to ensure that they get to paradise, and that they can go now, and not risk encountering some “sin” in the future which might make them ineligible for entry, then you would be a fool not to take that course of action for them.

I am sure that the parents who just murdered their children loved them as much as I love my kids. And they did what they believed would ensure the best “life” for them; namely, immediate entry to heaven. Which, for some religious groups, means killing other people. No Western religion is free of this stain. Judaism’s holy books revel in it unlike any other I’ve ever come across. It’s a positive duty to kill unbelievers, take their land and kill or enslave their people. That is why Richard Dawkins famously noted it as: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” If Hitler would have been Jewish, and been slaughtering Lutherans, there is no doubt he’d have been taken straight up to heaven by YHWH.3

So we have a case of religion, being believed as true, showing a course for a family to reach heaven together, and doing some good along the way. Were they terrorists? Were they trying to scare away the Christians, or to drive them into a conversion to Islam? I doubt it. They were trying to do the best for their kids and themselves, based on their understanding of the world. They did not develop this understanding because they were stupid, although they may have been ignorant of science and other philosophies and religions. Ignorance seems to often go hand-in-hand with strong religious beliefs, even when we are talking about intelligent, well educated people (Ted Cruz, a Senator in America comes to mind here – as there are few other people I’ve ever encountered who were so deserving of the epithet “ignoramus”).

Religion, by being the “answer” to all questions, admonishes its followers to eschew knowledge from unapproved sources (think of the Roman Catholic list of banned books, especially the ones on cosmology and science). Religions fear science, when they are trying to sell stories from thousands of years ago as being “real.” Any simple reading will show that all holy works are incompatible with our current scientific reality, but people either ignore the science, build a mental wall between science and religion, or just sit in the back row and hum quietly while trying not to think about it. Because believers really, really hope that there is a heaven where they can relax all day, drink beer, and not get fat. (And you won’t need Viagra anymore either.)

So when we talk about these people, who sacrificed themselves and their children on the altar of hope for a religious paradise, let’s not call them terrorists. They loved their kids. They wanted the best thing imaginable for them: an eternity of happiness. Until we recognize that this is the problem, it will never be solved. We will still have “just” wars, and executions with prayers being said before the killing is done, and politicians who open the day with a prayer and proceed to authorize funds for the murder of civilians in some far-off country that none of them have ever been to, etc. It’s all part of the same mindset. That any crime, when justified by religion, and validated and rewarded by paradise, is no crime at all. The families who killed themselves in Indonesia were merely at one end of the spectrum, in that they had strong beliefs, while most people still have some doubts – at least enough to prevent them from acting as if the whole heaven deal was real. Let’s hope that level of doubt continues to prevail for the vast majority of people.

I can’t be angry at the family. Only sad for the damage they did, and the loss of life all around. But if you really believe this religious nonsense, then they acted as good parents. Think of what they could have done with their lives and the lives of their children if they had been atheists instead.

DeYtH Banger - Notes (Part 3)

Note: Faith is ignorance of knowledge....

Note: God is a Fabricated lie... or let's say... Religion is Fabricated by ManKind

Note: God was created to make people who are alone to have purpose and to have somebody around them...

...

Jesus and Thomas Jefferson

If opinion and knowledge was accurate and just, and we looked at it fairly and objectively, we would look at Jesus as we look at Thomas Jefferson. Both of these men (whether one actually existed or not) were behind monumental documents containing not entirely original, yet immensely impactful ideas that greatly influenced the world. And yet they both were very flawed, both were products of their time, and their respective issues are so serious that some justifiably throw them out and discredit them completely.

Informed readers know that Jefferson thought Jesus, though he believed nothing of Christian mythology, one of the greatest moral teachers in human history. I am perplexed how someone as clear thinking and enlightened as he was overall could believe this so strongly, because even he acknowledge much of what came out of the character Jesus' mouth in scripture was absurd and deplorable. But he convinced himself much of the absurd and deplorable content was inserted by his "biographers" and others who corrupted his simple teachings. Jefferson also knew well, being one of the absolute greatest pioneers for secularization of government and freedom of religion in all of history, just how awful and bloody the legacy of Christianity actually had been, and he knew it derived directly from scripture (something he had no problem cutting up with a razor to separate its "diamonds from dunghills"),the ending of which, the book of Revelation, he called the "ravings of a maniac." He knew the God of Moses was "cruel, capricious, and unjust", he knew Jesus was portrayed as thinking demons cause sickness and much else that he concurred was nonsense, whose "spells on the human mind", along with priestcraft, held the progress of the human mind in an "ominous" state.

I haven't come upon any commentary by Jefferson on the idea of eternal torture for non-Christians, but that doctrine certainly is the height of sadism and injustice and has caused unquantifiable harm through history, and is advocated clearly by the "prince of peace" who often isn't quite so peaceful, and who (or at least the character crafted by the biblical writers) espoused many other very questionable things, from preaching the imminent end of the world, to encouraging followers to hate and abandon their families, to pronouncing it ok to not wash your hands before eating,to urging us to not think of tomorrow and to not resist evil, to applauding Old Testament barbarism. He himself also says nothing against slavery and uses slavery analogies. The character of Jesus does get credit for not directly espousing so much of the blatant misogyny that he nevertheless surely knew about and permeates the Bible. I'd say, even taking into account all the good that the very best ideas attributed to the character of Jesus have inspired (though much of it coming thanks to the religion being stripped of power by modernity), this is at the very least a very, very mixed picture.

With respect to Thomas Jefferson, unlike with Jesus, I actually am a fairly big fan, despite his flaws. I have many books. For one, he never claimed to be and was never perceived to be anything more than an imperfect human being. As stark as the indictment is regarding the deep contradiction of the great ideas of freedom and equality that he so eloquently articulated and his actually owning slaves, the positive attributes and the effect they had in the world overcome that admittedly conspicuous blemish that rightly stains his image. Because again, the issue of slavery was ubiquitous and ancient, as unflattering as that fact is for humanity, and he was still to a degree a product of his time, though he was, for a time,one of the first and greatest opponents of slavery. And if we start judging all historical figures by modern standards I think we're heading down a very useless and unreasonable path. I agree with Carl Sagan that Jefferson was an enormous and indelible pillar that erected and holds up the modern world and all the progress and Enlightenment ideals that have seen humanity make such unprecedented progress in absolutely every possible area, scientific to moral to political.

I have no problem looking upon Jesus as an imperfect historical figure or myth who had and preached some good things. I have no problem appreciating those things and acknowledging any good they have done. I do have a problem with venerating such a figure and the context he comes in, the book his name is attached to, and holding such things as supreme and perfect, that are so obviously imperfect, and filled with so much absurdity and poison. I have problems with foundations made of intellectual dishonesty, obfuscation, and indoctrination. I would have a problem with The Iliad or The Odyssey being venerated as the supreme object of reality as the Bible is. How we look upon The Iliad or The Odyssey, how we appreciate and criticize those man-made books is precisely how we should treat their Near Eastern counterpart in the Bible. I sit back and imagine how the world would be if the tides of history had flowed differently and mankind viewed these things based on their actual merit and support of evidence and validity. How much better would the world be for it? Or better yet, how much better would the world be if a benevolent and wise god actually had produced a book and gave it to us from the beginning? It would be clear and unassailable what that book was. What would the world look like then?

Extra Material to Check Out

Here is some books to check out

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins (This is A Bible... Encyclopedy... it tells a lot about God... give a try)

Bible Arguments (1)

By DeYtH Banger

"The delusional belief that what we do matters for all of eternity provides a false hope. Such a false hope falls under the Marxist critique that religion acts like a drug to numb us from the pain of injustice on earth through hope of a heaven in the afterlife. Having eyes on a heaven in the sky causes believers to be no earthly good. In fact, the hope of an afterlife devalues human life. Who really cares if people die when we go to war? The righteous will go to heaven. So let’s go to war. What does it matter if we abuse the environment? This earth is not our eternal home. What does it really matter that a tsunami wiped out a quarter of a million people? God will reward believers with eternal life. “The poor you will always have with you,” Jesus reportedly said (Matt. 26:11)."

- John W. Loftus

"Neither Sinatra’s boots nor rocks nor human beings were created by a deity for any purpose. Unlike boots and rocks though, we have evolved to be our own meaning makers. We were thrust into this world and must now make the best of this life. We cannot do otherwise Let’s talk about what we need to have a happy and fulfilling life. We need people. No one is an island. Social ostracism is painful, as is poverty, illness, or a life lived in prison. It’s doubtful any reasonable person prefers these things to having friends, wealth, food, health, and freedom. So in order to gain these benefits a person must have a kind and trustworthy character, earn his or her keep, stay healthy and fit, and obey the law. People who pursue risky behaviors or sick fantasies will eventually lose their freedom; so reasonable people don’t chase after those things.

Since we cannot turn on and off what we value like a faucet, we must sometimes act contrary to our immediate self-interests for an overall life plan that includes friendship, love, and worth. Holistic happiness is its own reward. That is all the meaning we need in life."

- John W. Loftus

"Once locked inside the house of life we must get along if we want the benefits of a life worthy to be lived, and that means mutual cooperation. Those who refuse we ostracize. Those who choose to hurt others will eventually be caught and banished from society in jail."

- John W. Loftus

"There are other conceptions of gods with their own moralities. And how does this being communicate to us what is permitted? Isn’t it evident that the Christian God has not effectively done so, given the biblical record and the history of the church?
There is no evidence that a Christian God is needed for morality since many non-Christian cultures have done very well for themselves in their own time periods with no Christian influence at all, such as Greece during the Golden Age, the Roman Empire, China, and Japan. This is nothing but a parochial, narrow-minded, and uninformed claim. I think all a believer has to do is travel the globe to see this."

- John W. Loftus

"Morality evolves. It has done so from the very beginning. Morality is not even unique to human beings. We find precursors of it in the nonhuman species.

But maybe I’ve missed the point?

If this is supposed to be an argument for the existence of God, not even Richard Swinburne, one of the greatest living Christian apologists, thinks it works: “I cannot see any force in an argument to the existence of God from the existence of morality.”[3] If it doesn’t convince him, why should it convince me, or anyone else for that matter."

- John W. Loftus

"Does God create morality? If so, he can create any kind of morality at all. Then any acts—even horrific ones—could be morally obligatory simply because God commands them. Or must God instead derive morality from a higher source? If so, even God must obey it. Christian philosophers have all but abandoned the divine command theory, or at least modified it. All they can say is that God is what he is and that he does what he does. That’s it!"

- John W. Loftus

"‘Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.’ Really? What do you mean? You want me to kill my children? Why them? Yes, I know they are unrighteous, lacking a care for godly things. That’s my fault as a mother. Why me? You want to test me just like you tested Abraham with Isaac? Are you sure? I just can’t do that. You want me to drown them in the bathtub? If you insist, Lord."

- John W. Loftus

"Contrary to Randal, if there is a God, everything can be permitted, for faith-based reasoning can justify any evil deed. In fact, religion is what turns otherwise good people into evil monsters because they think God told them what to do, either “audibly” or from something they read in the Bible."

- John W. Loftus

"John’s Opening Statement

Child sacrifice was commanded of the Israelites by Yahweh, the biblical God. In Exodus 22:29–30 we read:

You shall not delay to offer from the fulness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The first-born of your sons you shall give to me. You shall do likewise with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its dam; on the eighth day you shall give it to me. (RSV)

The context of this passage concerns offerings and sacrifices, and it says God requires firstborn sons to be literally sacrificed to him. Later on we find Yahweh admitting he commanded this in Ezekiel 20:25–26, where he purportedly said:

Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the LORD [Yahweh]. (RSV)."

- John W. Loftus

"The case of Micah 6:6–8 is an interesting one. In it child sacrifice is considered the greatest and highest form of sacrifice, for the prophet has a progression of three parts in pondering what will please Yahweh the most. Micah first considers sacrificing one-year-old calves; then he considers sacrificing thousands of rams; then he culminates in considering the highest offering he could give Yahweh: his firstborn son. His logic depends on child sacrifice being the greatest sacrifice of all—more than that of sacrificing the calves or rams—for the shocking conclusion of his ruminations is that even this greatest sacrifice is unacceptable to Yahweh without justice. For while all of these acts were required by Yahweh, they meant nothing without also doing acts of justice.

Child sacrifice was only later considered evil after Josiah’s reforms and even more so after the Babylonian exile. Even the later rhetoric in Deuteronomy 12:29–31 and Jeremiah 7:31, 19:5, and 32:35 which condemns the practice all assumes that people thought it was acceptable to Yahweh. Otherwise why would these later authors find a need to condemn it? In other texts the practice was condemned primarily because it was offered to other deities (2 Kings 17:17; 23:10; 2 Chron. 28:3; 33:4–10; Ps. 106:38; Isa. 57:5–6; Ezek. 16:20–21; 20:26, 31; 23:37, 39)."

- John W. Loftus

Bible Arguments (2)

By DeYtH Banger

"So despite some biblical exhortations that child sacrifice was alien to the worship of Yahweh, a closer inspection shows instead that this practice was within the mainstream theology of the Yahweh cult. Only at a late stage in the history of Israelite religion was child sacrifice branded as counter to the will of Yahweh.

Nearly all ancient cultures sacrificed human beings—especially virgins and children—to their gods to please them. This is utterly barbaric, conceived by a barbaric people who had no clue what an eternally good God could ever want them to do. In the New Testament Christians even interpreted the death of Jesus as God sacrificing his only begotten Son to atone for our sins."

- John W. Loftus

"Randal is rejecting the Bible in favor of his own moral intuitions here—ones I share. That’s what he’s doing. And if he can do this once, then why not just reject it all along with me? He has the gall to proclaim, despite the evidence, that God is “a maximally competent author.” But if this is true, why did his God communicate in such an incompetent manner that caused a number of children to be needlessly butchered."

- John W. Loftus

"Primarily we’ve learned that the gods are not leaning over a celestial balcony looking down on earth and smelling the smoke of burning flesh as it rises to them. Nor do they open the floodgates of heaven to send rain for our crops. The universe is bigger than this and the rain falls naturally. So there is no one “up there” we need to appease. And there is no reason to kill our children to make it rain either."

- John W. Loftus

"Can’t he say “no, don’t do that,” like any good parent? This is a lame excuse for a God. This practice is barbaric by Randal’s own standards, which is the point."

- John W. Loftus

"John’s Opening Statement

There are several genocidal texts from the lips of Yahweh, the biblical God. You see it reflected in Joshua 6:16–25; Deuteronomy 2:4–34; 7:1–6; and

Numbers 31:7–18 (cf. Isa. 13:13–22; Ps. 137:7–9). In Deuteronomy 20:16–18 we read:

But as for the towns of these peoples that the LORD [Yahweh] your God is giving you as an inheritance, you must not let anything that breathes remain alive. You shall annihilate them—the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites—just as the LORD [Yahweh] your God has commanded, so that they may not teach you to do all the abhorrent things that they do for their gods, and you thus sin against the LORD [Yahweh] your God. (NRSV)

In 1 Samuel 15:1–3 we read:

And Samuel said to Saul, “The LORD [Yahweh] sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore hearken to the words of the LORD [Yahweh]. Thus says the LORD of hosts [Yahweh of Armies], ‘I will punish what Amalek did to Israel in opposing

them on the way, when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’” (RSV)

The rationale for justifying genocide has fallen by the wayside among evangelicals since there can be no justifying it—not in an era that endorses the Geneva Convention, which condemns the killing of innocent noncombatants. Randal is one of these evangelicals, so I’ll let him make that case for me. All such attempts fail. They ultimately force apologists to embrace a cultural relativism."

- John W. Loftus

"By contrast, the God of the Bible exacerbated child exploitation with his so-called “satire” because it was written in an era when genocide was not morally questionable. Believers have likewise obeyed the Bible precisely because it’s considered divinely inspired. It was obvious to everyone that Swift was writing a satire, whereas this is not the case at all with the God of the Bible. Randal’s moral intuitions have merely caused him to once again reject the Bible."

- John W. Loftus

"The God explanation has suffered so many huge hits that it’s surprising anyone continues to tout it at all.

Thomas Aquinas argued that God was the unmoved mover in a series of contemporaneous events stretching hierarchically up some sort of great chain of being. But such an argument is rendered bogus in light of the concept of inertia, which does away with the need to explain motion as requiring either an infinite regress of causes or an unmoved mover. And so it goes for all of the other cosmological and design arguments to the existence of God—something I won’t pursue further here."

- John W. Loftus

"As modern science advances, it creates an ever-increasing number of new mysteries that scientists are in the process of solving. So faith will probably always find a foothold in mystery. This is the reason why I must show Randal’s faith is impossible before he will ever consider it to be improbable, which is an unreasonable standard. My point is that science, not faith, solved the mysteries of the past, and it is science, not faith, that has opened up the number of new mysteries today. Faith by contrast has no method and solves no mysteries."

- John W. Loftus

"Faith by itself produces nothing and is dead without mysteries.

As far as I can tell, even if there is a god of some kind, he may have only created what Edward Tryon and Stephen Hawking both describe as a “quantum wave fluctuation”[11] and then committed divine suicide afterwards, or died in order to create. Or instead, a god may exist who is guiding the universe ultimately toward an evil purpose but has maliciously chosen to present himself as benevolent to trick us. If such a trickster god exists, then all of the evidence leading Christians to conclude their good God exists was simply planted there to deceive us by that very same God. I can see no reasonable objection to these other god-hypotheses once we allow them into our equations."

- John W. Loftus

"So even if there is a God who created the whole shebang, then as far as I can tell there is no reason to believe this god is Randal’s God. Such an entity is therefore an unnecessary hypothesis. It actually gets in the way of solving the mysteries of existence, as history repeatedly shows."

- John W. Loftus

"Can we really imagine a being who never learned anything? Can we really imagine a being who cannot think, since doing so means a conclusion has not been reached yet? How did this nonmaterial agent create a material universe out of nothing unless there is some aspect that this agent shares with a material world? How did a timeless being create the universe in time, since the very decision to create it would be simultaneous with the act of creating it? The universe would therefore be an eternal one if he created it at all, and such a being would never be found timeless. Finally, why did he create anything at all, since he neither needs nor wants anything at all."

- John W. Loftus

"With Randal’s God explanation there is no reason to investigate why the universe exists, since he says science can’t do this. This is the standard theistic response to the unsolved mysteries of the past. Why keep betting on faith to solve them when it has solved nothing so far."

- John W. Loftus

Bible Arguments (3)

By DeYtH Banger

"This topic raises the issue of the goodness of the divine revelation in the Bible for a good, omnipotent, and omniscient God. It also raises the problem of suffering (or evil) if such a God exists. If any issue speaks against the goodness of the biblical conception of God, this is it.

Former American slave Frederick Douglass described how his Christian master whipped his aunt right before his young eyes:

He took her into the kitchen, and stripped her from neck to waist. He made her get upon the stool, and he tied her hands to a hook in the joist. After rolling up his sleeves, he commenced to lay on the heavy cowskin, and soon the warm, red blood came dripping to the floor. . . . No words, no tears, no prayers, from his gory victim, seemed to move his iron heart from its bloody purpose. The louder she screamed, the harder he whipped; and where the blood ran fastest, there he whipped longest. He would whip her to make her scream, and whip her to make her hush; and not until overcome by fatigue, would he cease to swing the blood clotted cowskin."

- John W. Loftus

"This simply cannot be true given evolution as a scientific fact. There are precursors of our own reasoning abilities found in animals. There is morality, consciousness, tool-making, learning, problem-solving, community, and communication.[24] At some point human beings could comprehend that an A(pple) is an A(pple) and not an O(range), so A=A and A≠O. They also comprehended something we must all do to stay alive.

1. If we want to stay alive then we must eat.

2. We want to stay alive.

3. Therefore we must eat."

- John W. Loftus

"The brains of dogs, donkeys, and dolphins work to help them survive. The brains of chimps, chicks, and chipmunks help them survive. The brains of pigs, porcupines, and platypuses help them survive. If their brains had not evolved as they did, then they wouldn’t have survived. Why then is it different with human beings."

- John W. Loftus

"The brains of dogs, donkeys, and dolphins work to help them survive. The brains of chimps, chicks, and chipmunks help them survive. The brains of pigs, porcupines, and platypuses help them survive. If their brains had not evolved as they did, then they wouldn’t have survived. Why then is it different with human beings."

- John W. Loftus

"Christians have their own difficulties when justifying reason. Nominalists, following William of Ockham (1288–1348), argue that God does not have a nature, and as such, he does not have the property (or attribute) of reason. They argue that a full-blown concept of God is one in which he created reason; otherwise where did it come from? The alternative that he must obey the dictates of reason implies that reason itself is independent of God; and if that’s the case, we don’t need God to justify reason. So whence comes reason on Christian grounds."

- John W. Loftus

"How does Randal propose we know something if it isn’t useful to us and discovered by trial and error? Surely he understands the difficulties with the correspondence and coherence theories of truth given that we don’t have access to the thing-in-itself, as Immanuel Kant successfully argued. We’re not talking in terms of ontology—about that which exists. Instead, we’re always talking in terms of epistemology, that is, how we can know it. Pragmatism works despite the fact that Randal doesn’t like the conclusion."

- John W. Loftus

"Adaptive beliefs are the ones that are useful for our survival. The rest of our beliefs, no matter how many of them we have, are either irrelevant to our survival or detrimental to it. I think religious beliefs are largely detrimental to our survival as a species in a world with weapons of mass destruction."

- John W. Loftus

"As I said earlier, a religion should be judged based on how it treats the defenseless. Women have largely been defenseless in a male-dominated society stemming in the West from what we
find in the Bible. Given the cruelty toward women that we see there and acted out in history, all civilized people should reject Christianity as nothing but a religion created in a barbaric, sexist era. While there are a few positive female role models and pro-women statements in the Bible, overall it is anti-women. These texts need to be explained, not explained away.

A man was created first, not a woman, so Paul argued that men alone are created in the image of God (1 Cor. 11:3–9). The woman was merely created to be a man’s helper (Gen. 2:18–24). Women are considered the easily deceived weaker sex who can mislead men just as Eve misled Adam (1 Cor. 11:3; 1 Pet. 3:7). That’s why God said men will rule (or domineer) over them (Gen. 3:16). That’s why Paul told women to keep silent in his churches (1 Cor. 14:34–35; see also 1 Tim. 2:11
14). That’s also why women are to be subject to their husbands “in everything” (Eph. 5:24).

In fact, as biblical scholar Michael Coogan argues, “Husbands and fathers had virtually absolute control over their wives and daughters.”[26] Sarah called her husband “lord” (Gen. 18:12) and “obeyed” him (1 Pet. 3:6; see vv. 1–6). These things reflect the status of a wife, writes Coogan, for “she was under her husband’s rule, she was his property."

- John W. Loftus

"The really horrific stuff is how Yahweh treated his unfaithful wife, Israel. Biblical scholar Susanne Scholz informs us, “God turns out to be a rapist.”[31] His wife is described as whoring after other lovers, so in return Yahweh sexually violates her and says she is to be blamed for her punishment. Biblical scholar J. Cheryl Exum translates Isaiah 3:17 like this: “The Lord will make bald the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will bare their cunts.”[32] In Jeremiah 13:22–26 Yahweh announces the rape of Jerusalem, and then he does this with “the obscene practice of exposing women by drawing their legs over their heads in order to uncover their vulvas completely.”[33]

Yahweh punished his unfaithful wives like this, both Samaria and Jerusalem. (Yes, Yahweh was a polygamist!) The prophets Hosea (chapter 2), Jeremiah (chapter 13), and Ezekiel (chapters 16 and 23) tell us…"

- John W. Loftus

"They simply turn a deaf ear to the majority voices, something I call cherry-picking. Do Christians really think that a God who could threaten to kill off all the Israelites for disobedience could not have enforced a decent, civilized attitude toward women? Their delusion is probably never seen more than here."

- John W. Loftus

"While there are a few positive things said about animals in the Bible, over all it is uncaring and oblivious toward the pain and suffering we know that sentient animals experience. These texts need to be explained, not explained away.

After creating the world, God declared it all “good.” Good for whom? Good for what purpose? To humans alone was given the right to “subdue” and have “dominion” over every living thing (Gen. 1:28 RSV). When we look at these Hebrew words, subdue literally means “to trample upon” (see Esther 7:8; Jer. 34:11; Zech. 9:15). The word dominion means to “master” over someone, especially when he or she refuses to be subdued (the same Hebrew word is used to describe ruling over slaves in 1 Kings 9:23 and Isa. 14:2)."

- John W. Loftus

"My claim is that we do not see much of a concern for animals in the Bible. It truly is anthropocentric to the core. And as such, it’s not indicative at all of what a perfectly good God would reveal to us. If God was truly concerned for the welfare of animals, he would have consistently said, “Thou shalt not mistreat or abuse animals.” Then Western Christianized people could not justify the ill treatment of them down through the centuries.

God simply should not have created predation in the natural world; he should have made us all vegetarians or vegans. The amount of creaturely suffering in this world is atrocious as animals prey on one another to feed themselves, including humans feeding on animals."

- John W. Loftus

"There are some things I know without much doubt at all. The most certain thing I know is the cogito of René Descartes: “I think therefore I am.” Could I be wrong and not really exist? I doubt it. And as long as I doubt it there is someone doing the doubting—me. There are other things I know; for instance, I know I’m typing these words and drinking some coffee while I do. (Ahhh, that tasted good.) I have no reason at all to doubt my senses and the
personal experiences I’m presently having. They are incorrigible to me. Do I have faith that my coffee tastes good? No, I personally sense that it tastes good. There are other things I know without too much doubt—things too many to even list—and they are all based on solid empirical evidence along with good reasons for thinking them to be so. The more evidence and reasons there are for what I think is the case, then the more I can claim them to be the case.

When it comes to faith, there are at least two ways to understand it. First, faith as hopeful, wishful thinking, motivates us to achieve great things. It helps us win the love and affection of a lover, a sports contest, or an important award. Sometimes we must maintain it in the face of all odds; otherwise we may quit trying. This kind of faith is like a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it cannot make something come true that doesn’t involve our actions."

- John W. Loftus

"There are some things I know without much doubt at all. The most certain thing I know is the cogito of René Descartes: “I think therefore I am.” Could I be wrong and not really exist? I doubt it. And as long as I doubt it there is someone doing the doubting—me. There are other things I know; for instance, I know I’m typing these words and drinking some coffee while I do. (Ahhh, that tasted good.) I have no reason at all to doubt my senses and the
Faith will not change these kind of facts. So when faith is used to make facts true that it cannot make true, I think faith is pretty much irrational. Wishful thinking about facts we cannot make true is not what thinking adults should do.

Faith in the second sense is always a leap beyond the probabilities, for if something is highly probable then I don’t believe it to be true. I know it to be true by the degree of probability it has. We need to think exclusively in terms of probabilities and not try to add faith to them since faith doesn’t add anything at all. If we did this, all that would matter would be the probabilities. There would be no need for faith. Faith in this sense means someone is accepting an improbable conclusion."

- John W. Loftus

"Psychology professor James Alcock defines faith-based reasoning as “belief in search of data.” Full stop. Think about the implications of this and you’ll realize that we must cultivate doubt not faith. Doubt is, after all, the adult attitude.

Evolutionary psychologist Jesse Bering calls belief “an instinct” in that “we have a cognitive bias to see intentions in inanimate objects.”[56] Pascal Boyer, professor of collective and individual memory, argues that we are “agency detectors” just like our animal predecessors who thought they saw agents, or predators, in the rustling leaves.[57] Agency detecting produced many more false alarms than actual threats to their lives, but because they had that instinct, they survived. Human beings also see agents in inanimate objects."

- John W. Loftus

"…concluded there were supernatural agent(s) above the clouds who were angry. They saw it in bumper crops and wives who gave birth to baby boys and concluded there were supernatural agent(s) who were pleased. Believers today still cannot bring themselves to think the universe was not created by a supernatural agent precisely because they still are agency detectors. This is the problem to overcome…"

- John W. Loftus

"We need only look to the alternative proposition that people are within their epistemic rights to believe without sufficient evidence in any other area. That’s a recipe for disaster, and Randal knows this."

- John W. Loftus

"…their particular trinitarian, incarnational, resurrection faith in the back door? Mormons and Muslims do the same thing…"

- John W. Loftus

"Given cognitive faculties that are functioning properly, our senses are more than adequate to draw reasonable. conclusions about our experiences. Look at the lengths Randal must go in order to slip his God through the cracks. No wonder I think he’s deluded. Faith is an irrational leap over the probabilitiesconclusions about our experiences. Look at the lengths Randal must go in order to slip his God through the cracks. No wonder I think he’s deluded. Faith is an irrational leap over the probabilities."

- John W. Loftus

Bible Arguments (4)

By DeYtH Banger

"Randal’s intention here is to argue for the existence of God from the supposed existence of objective aesthetic beauty.

For me, this is simple. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It has to be. There is no beauty in the world at all, just as there isn’t anything ugly either. There is no color or sound or taste or smell or pain in the world. All that exists is raw, uninterpreted stuff. There are objects having certain shapes, objects that are made up of certain particles reflected in the periodic table of elements, and objects that are made of molecules and atoms. There are also wavelengths originating from moving objects or particles emitting from them. So seeing is dependent on a beholder. Hearing is dependent on a hearer."

- John W. Loftus

"What we find beautiful is largely based on our biology and thus explained by evolution. Just consider what the various animals in the world may think is beautiful. Take dogs for instance. Their olfactory senses are extremely sensitive. I saw a program in which a bloodhound was given the scent of a particular man and subsequently found the seat where that man had sat among thousands of seats in a huge stadium. But guess what smells wonderful to these dogs? Butts. Smelly, stinky butts. They stick their noses in them—especially butts of other dogs. It must smell really good to them, beautiful that is, even though with their sense of smell it must be extremely bombshell-busting strong."

- John W. Loftus

"The Bible speaks often as if God doesn’t know the future (Gen. 22:12; Deut. 13:3; Jer. 3:7, 19–20; 26:3; 32:35; Ezek. 12:3; and Jon. 3:10). Why then should we think there is any reason he can…"

- John W. Loftus

"There are a few easily seen failed prophecies. Isaiah predicted the river Nile would dry up (Isa. 19:5–7). Isaiah predicted Damascus would cease to be a city (Isa. 17:1–2). Ezekiel predicted Nebuchadnezzar would destroy the city of Tyre (Ezek. 26:7–14) but later admitted this didn’t happen (Ezek. 29:17–20). Revising his original prediction, Ezekiel predicted instead that Egypt would become desolate and that Nebuchadnezzar would conquer it (Ezek. 29:8–12, 19–20). But that too never happened. Jeremiah predicted Jehoiakim, the king of Judah, would have no successor (Jer. 36:30) even though he was succeeded by Jehoiachin, his son (2 Kings 24:6). The prophets Haggai and Zechariah both predicted in their day that Zerubbabel was the long-awaited messiah (Hag. 2:20–23; Zech. 4:6:9–13; compare Zech. 6:9–15…"

- John W. Loftus

"Almost every scientific study done on prayer has shown that prayers are not statistically answered any better than luck.[72] Research has shown us that people are prone to misjudge the true probabilities for any given event—we’re often wrong. Take a deep breath right now. Mathematician John Allen Paulos asks us to consider the odds of whether we have just inhaled a molecule that came out of Caesar’s mouth when he said, “You too Brutus?” You’ll probably doubt this, but he shows that the odds of this happening stand at about 99 percent.[73]

The fact is that incredible coincidences are common, even virtually certain, given enough opportunities for them to occur in the lives of millions of believers. The most we can say about them is that their causes are unknown. So once again Randal is arguing from the gaps—a…"

- John W. Loftus

"When it comes to miracles due to prayer, it gets worse. Believing in them demands a nearly impossible double burden of proof. What believers must show is that a miracle could not have happened within the natural world because it was nearly impossible (or else it’s not considered miraculous). Then they must turn right around and claim such an impossible event probably took place anyway. The probability that a miracle actually took place is inversely proportional to the probability that such an event could take place (i.e., the less probable it is that a miracle could take place, then the more probable it is that it didn’t take place), so the improbability of a miracle claim defeats any attempt to show it probably happened. That’s why extraordinary claims of miracles demand a greater amount of solid evidence for them (e.g., if a person tells us he levitated, we need more than just his testimony to believe him)…"

- John W. Loftus

"Believers have built in biases to accept miracles because they have a need to believe them. It basically shows us that people are still agency detectors—something we inherited from our animal ancestors. Since we know this about ourselves, it should cause us to be skeptical that there are agents behind unexplained events.

That there are some unexplained events I’ll admit, just as there are some good things said in the Bible concerning women and animals. But the bad things must be explained and not just explained away.

This raises the problem of suffering (or evil). There is no excuse for a good God not to do miracles for the millions of believers who suffer intensely around the world. For every personal claim of a miracle healing, there are perhaps hundreds of thousands of people who receive no such thing."

- John W. Loftus

"We do indeed have a design filter preprogrammed into us from our animal ancestors to see agents behind improbable events given the proper circumstances. We are also not good at predicting the actual probabilities of an improbable event. So we should not trust personal anecdotal evidence but instead trust the scientific studies on prayer."

- John W. Loftus

"We suffer from allergies, colds, migraines, Alzheimer’s disease, anemia, asthma, bronchitis, colitis, Crohn’s disease, epilepsy, gallstones, gastritis, glaucoma, gout, abnormal blood
pressure, kidney stones, chicken pox, small pox, polio, Parkinson’s disease, psoriasis, strokes, sudden infant death syndrome, thrombosis, tumors, typhoid fever, ulcers, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Lyme disease, malaria, rabies, rickets, Rocky Mountain spotted fever, tuberculosis, diphtheria, leprosy, measles, meningitis, mumps, pneumonia, rubella, syphilis, shingles, scoliosis, whooping cough, Down syndrome, hemophilia, Huntington’s disease, muscular dystrophy, sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, AIDS, infertility, and so on. Major epidemics have decimated us, like the ones occurring in the years AD 542, 1331, 1556, and 1918. There are birth defects that include people born with two heads, with deformed limbs, blind, deaf, mute; and people born with mental deficiencies including dementia, bipolar disorder, and paranoid schizophrenia.

There is much more I could add, but thinking people get the point. There isn’t an intelligent designer. Even if Randal still believes there is one anyway, this supernatural force (or being) is not a benevolent one, much less an omnibenevolent one. To argue that this is all Eve’s fault in Eden is scapegoating."

- John W. Loftus

"Randal is taking an irrational leap over the probabilities. A good, intelligent creator should show he cares for each individual on this planet. If he does not, we can reasonably conclude he either does not care or he does not exist at all.

He’s punting to God’s omniscience as an answer—something other theists do to save their own omniscient God from refutation, making faith unfalsifiable. This proves once again that believers must be convinced their faith is nearly impossible before they will consider it improbable, which is an unreasonable standard. Even if God is omniscient and has higher ways than us, we still must know enough of his ways to know that he exists and that he cares for us—and if omniscient, he should know this about us."

- John W. Loftus

"First look at J. L. Schellenberg’s persuasive argument from divine hiddenness:

1. If there is a God, he is perfectly
loving.

2. If a perfectly loving God exists, reasonable nonbelief does not occur.

3. Reasonable nonbelief occurs.

4. No perfectly loving God exists (from 2 and 3).

5. Hence, there is no God (from 1 and 4).[83]

If I have shown anything in this book, then I have a reasonable nonbelief. Therefore, unless someone can still maintain against the evidence that I don’t have a reasonable nonbelief, Schellenberg’s argument has been shown correct.

Now consider Theodore Drange’s persuasive argument from unbelief for the existence of an evangelical God.

1. God wants all humans to believe before they die.

2. God can bring about that all, or almost all, humans believe before they die.

3. God always acts in accordance with what he most wants.

4. If God exists, all or almost all humans would believe before they die (from 1).

5. But not all humans believe before they die.

6. Therefore, God does not exist (from 2 and 3)"

- John W. Loftus

"The reason we sometimes act like brutes is because we evolved from them. There is therefore no need for atonement. It’s who we are, and it’s something that we alone can fix as morality evolves. The only reason Randal believes our rage (or sins) need atoning is because he was raised in a Western, Christianized culture. The vast majority of people in the world do not think someone like Jesus needs to be punished to death for the rest of us to be forgiven by a god."

- John W. Loftus

Bible Argument (5)

By DeYtH Banger

“When it comes to defending his faith, all Randal can do is revert to special pleading, arguing from ignorance, and repeatedly punting to mere possibilities even though probabilities are all that.
We either start with the brute fact that something has always existed or the brute fact that something popped into existence out of nothing. So the simpler our brute fact is then the more probable it is, per Ockham’s razor. All that scientists have to assume is an equilibrium of positive and negative energy and the laws of physics. This is as close to nothing as science can get. But grant it and physicist Victor Stenger argues, “The probability for there being something rather than nothing can actually be calculated; it is over 60 percent.” As such, “only by the constant action of an agent outside the universe, such as God, could a state of nothingness be maintained. The fact that we have something is just what we would expect if there is no God.”

- John W. Loftus

“My claim is that the raw, uninterpreted historical data is simply not enough to believe God raised Jesus from the dead because there can be no relevant background knowledge or “priors” prior to concluding he did. The main reason Christians think the historical evidence for the resurrection is conclusive is because they have already come to believe in a God who did this particular miracle, and that’s pretty much it. Overwhelming numbers of Jews in the days of Jesus did not believe it, along with millions of other people even after being confronted with this so-called evidence.”

- John W. Loftus

“We do not think there is sufficient evidence to believe in supernatural forces or beings. Since this is the case, religionists must determine among themselves who is their best contender to face off against us. That process did not happen here precisely because they cannot agree among themselves who should be in the finals.”

- John W. Loftus

“All that believers must do is apply the same level of skepticism to their own religion as they do to the religions of others that they reject. This is what I call the outsider test for faith. When believers understand why they dismiss all other religions, they will understand why I dismiss theirs. If they refuse to do this, I merely ask them why the double standard? Why treat other religions differently than you do your own? Believers should be skeptical of what they were taught to accept given the proliferation of so many other religions.

and sects separated into distinct regions on the planet who learned their religion in the same way—on their mama’s knee.

Be well”
- John W. Loftus

“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?”

- Richard Dawkins

“If you think that, you might enjoy Chapter 3 on ‘Arguments for God’s existence’ – the arguments turn out to be spectacularly weak. Maybe you think it is obvious that God must exist, for how else could the world have come into being? How else could there be life, in all its rich diversity, with every species looking uncannily as though it had been ‘designed’? If your thoughts run along those lines, I hope you will gain enlightenment from Chapter 4 on ‘Why there almost certainly is no God’. Far from pointing to a designer, the illusion of design in the living world is explained with far greater economy and with devastating elegance by Darwinian natural selection.”

- Richard Dawkins

“If you feel trapped in the religion of your upbringing, it would be worth asking yourself how this came about. The answer is usually some form of childhood indoctrination. If you are religious at all it is overwhelmingly probable that your religion is that of your parents. If you were born in Arkansas and you think Christianity is true and Islam false, knowing full well that you would think the opposite if you had been born in Afghanistan, you are the victim of childhood indoctrination. Mutatis mutandis if you were born in Afghanistan.

The whole matter of religion and childhood is the subject of Chapter 9, which also includes my third consciousness-raiser. Just as feminists wince when they hear ‘he’ rather than ‘he or she’, or ‘man’ rather than ‘human’, I want everybody to flinch whenever we hear a phrase such as ‘Catholic child’ or ‘Muslim child’. Speak of a ‘child of Catholic parents’ if you like; but if you hear anybody speak of a ‘Catholic child’, stop them and politely point out that children are too young to know where they stand on such issues, just as they are too young to know where they stand on economics or politics. Precisely because my purpose is consciousness-raising, I shall not apologize for mentioning it here in the Preface as well as in Chapter 9. You can’t say it too often. I’ll say it again. That is not a Muslim child, but a child of Muslim parents. That child is too young to know whether it is a Muslim or not. There is no such thing as a Muslim child. There is no such thing as a Christian child.

Chapters 1 and 10 top and tail the book by explaining, in their different ways, how a proper understanding of the magnificence of the real world, while never becoming a religion, can fill the inspirational role that religion has historically – and inadequately – usurped My fourth consciousness-raiser is atheist pride. Being an atheist is nothing to be apologetic about. On the contrary, it is something to be proud of, standing tall to face the far horizon, for atheism nearly always indicates a healthy independence of mind and, indeed, a healthy mind. There are many people who know, in their heart of hearts, that they are atheists, but dare not admit it to their families or even, in some cases, to themselves. Partly, this is because the very word ‘atheist’ has been assiduously built up as a terrible and frightening label. Chapter 9 quotes the comedian Julia Sweeney’s tragi-comic story of her parents’ discovery, through reading a newspaper, that she had become an atheist. Not believing in God they could just about take, but an atheist! An ATHEIST? (The mother’s voice rose to a scream.”

- Richard Dawkins

“I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.”

–ALBERT EINSTEIN

“ DESERVED RESPECT

The boy lay prone in the grass, his chin resting on his hands. He suddenly found himself overwhelmed by a heightened awareness of the tangled stems and roots, a forest in microcosm, a transfigured world of ants and beetles and even – though he wouldn’t have
known the details at the time – of soil bacteria by the billions, silently and invisibly shoring up the economy of the micro-world. Suddenly the micro-forest of the turf seemed to swell and become one with the universe, and with the rapt mind of the boy contemplating it. He interpreted the experience in religious terms and it led him eventually to the priesthood. He was ordained an Anglican priest and became a chaplain at my school, a teacher of whom I was fond. It is thanks to decent liberal clergymen like him that nobody could ever claim that I had religion forced down my throat.*

In another time and place, that boy could have been me under the stars, dazzled by Orion, Cassiopeia and Ursa Major, tearful with the unheard music of the Milky Way, heady with the night scents of frangipani and trumpet flowers in an African garden. Why the same emotion should have led my chaplain in one direction and me in the…”

- Richard Dawkins

“How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant’? Instead they say, ‘No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’ A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths.”

- Richard Dawkins

“To me, that is religion!’ But is ‘religion’ the right word? I don’t think so. The Nobel Prize-winning physicist (and atheist) Steven Weinberg made the point as well as anybody, in Dreams of a Final Theory:

Some people have views of God that are so broad and flexible that it is inevitable that they will find God wherever they look for him. One hears it said that ‘God is the ultimate’ or ‘God is our better nature’ or ‘God is the universe.’ Of course, like any other word, the word ‘God’ can be given any meaning we like. If you want to say that God is energy,’ then you can find God in a lump of coal.”

- Richard Dawkins

Bible Arguments (6)

By DeYtH Banger

“That’s right. This is great news, because since you have been ignoring me all these years, and have not been giving me the proper respect I deserve, you have made me very upset. I become an angry person when I am not honored, when my loving character is not appreciated.

So, I built a torture chamber down in my basement.
It’s dark and hot down there, with sharp knives and chains and hooks on the walls, and a furnace with flames, and some smelly vats with caustic Lake-of-Fire chemicals. It’s horrible. But the good news is that you don’t have to go down there.
I sent my son down there.
It was ugly. It was horrific. My only-begotten son experienced an agony of suffering and shame.
But that satisfied my anger, and I’m not mad any more. It is finished. And that is great news for you! All you have to do is come up here on my porch and thank my bleeding son for what he did for you. Tell him you love him.”

- Dan Barker

““What is the life of life?” That question is based on a belief that life, like a tool, has no internal purpose of its own. If you don’t have the freedom to choose to strive for your own goals, then you are not really alive. You are a hammer. If you think your purpose must come from outside yourself, you are a lifeless implement or a slave to another mind.
And that is exactly what most religions teach. The so-called good news of Christian ity, for example, cheats its followers with the sleight of hand of trading purpose for purpose, euthanizing the individual by cutting out the heart of life and implanting it elsewhere. It turns a living creature into a dead shell.”

- Dan Barker

““But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.”3 He told believers to “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God.”4 Those words were written by a man who called himself a “slave” of Christ: “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ
who lives in me.”5 “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”6 “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.”7
In Christianity, you have to die so that someone else can live through you.”

- Dan Barker

“Rick Warren, best-selling author of The Purpose Driven Life, agrees with Paul and Jesus. He has sold tens of millions of books worldwide to worshipful believers who have been conned into thinking that life is not life…”

- Dan Barker

“He has convinced his flock that it is actually good to be a slave. For political reasons, the fame he has achieved as a shepherd preaching sheephood got him invited to offer the opening prayer at President Barack Obama’s first inauguration. What an irony that the most important civic ritual belonging to all Americans, the swearing in of our secular president, had to be “solemnized” by a superstitious sermonizer who believes that the authority of our nation stems not from we, the people, in pursuit of happiness, but from the sovereignty of a “Lord” who dictates that we must submit to his will because a talking snake tricked us into eating the fruit of knowledge.”

- Dan Barker

“Warren’s entire book; others have already done that. Robert M. Price’s book, The Reason Driven Life, neatly exposes the fact that The Purpose Driven Life is nothing more than newly packaged old-fashioned biblical fundamentalism.”

- Dan Barker

“Before he became wealthy selling sanctimonious self-help (the “self” not being the reader), he was charged with abusing the IRS tax code. In the early 1990s, his church had paid all or a substantial part of his salary as a cash “housing allowance,” allowing him to report little or no income, taking advantage of a little-known, unfair provision in the statutes that allows “ministers of the gospel” to exclude their rent or house payments from income, greatly lowering their tax liability.8 What Warren did was clearly wrong—he was excluding his entire salary as if he were spending it all on housing. He was cheating the rest of us taxpayers. But since the law was ambiguously stated, not setting a limit to the allowance, he did not have to pay penalties or back taxes. Congress mooted the case in 2002, getting Warren off the hook, but clarifying that from now on the housing allowance is limited to the fair rental value of the home.9 This pastor, like most clergy, apparently feels that preachers are a privileged class. His parishioners might have a purpose-driven life, but their leader has a loophole-driven life.”

- Dan Barker

“he means it only in its secondary usage. “It’s not about you,” he preaches. It’s all about God. He believes you have no say in your own purpose. “His purpose for your life predates your conception,” Warren confidently informs us, speaking about the specific deity depicted in his holy book. “He planned it before you existed, without your input! You may choose your career, your spouse, your hobbies, and many other parts of your life, but you don’t get to choose your purpose.”
Warren is exactly right, if you think the Christian scriptures are true. The New Testament tells Christians that they have no purpose of their own: “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”10 Jesus reportedly said: “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.”1”

- Dan Barker

“You are a hammer. A wrench. A pair of pliers.
Warren then insults atheists by insisting that those of us who do not hold his beliefs lead empty lives: “Without God, life has no purpose, and without purpose, life has no meaning. Without meaning, life has no significance or hope.”13 What planet is Reverend Warren living on? It seems…he hasn’t met many atheists. He doesn’t know that hundreds of millions of good people do not “begin with God,” do not believe in a god, yet live full meaningful lives. We are not the ones with the problem! We are alive. We think it is sad that so many human beings pretend to have no purpose of their own, that they are so willing to “die to themselves” (as the bible commands), submitting to someone else’s plan for their lives.”

- Dan Barker

“It is directed from outside your own life. “Whatever you do,” Paul also wrote, “do all to the glory of God.”15 Christians are toddlers who simply do what the parent says, “bringing every thought into captivity unto the obedience of Christ.”16 (The next time someone tells you there is freedom in Christ, read that verse to them. Whatever “captivity” is, it is not freedom.) In Christianity, the ultimate purpose is to glorify and worship the master, not to live or enjoy your own life. Even good works—which you would think should be aimed at the recipients of charity—are ultimately focused on the majesty of the heavenly father: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.”17 The biblical writers were shameless about this redirection of purpose: “If I was trying to please men,” Paul wrote, “I would not be a slave of Christ.”

- Dan Barker

“What is wrong with this picture? We normally detest a person who claims to own and control other human beings, so why do we think it is admirable when God does it? Because might makes right? Why do we honor that which we naturally despise? If you were a god, would you actually want others to bow down and kiss your feet? And what would the rest of us think of you? If there actually exists a praise-thirsty deity like the bible describes, then why should we worship him? Because he is the big boss and he demands it? Because if you don’t put your hands together and tell him how great he is you will be sent down into the basement?

Would you rather watch a movie about loyal captive subjects in the service of their omnipotent master, or a movie about a slave revolt? Which would be more exciting? What characters would you root for and sympathize with? So, why just a movie? Why not make your own life a slave revolt?”

- Dan Barker

“Asking, “If there is no God, what is the purpose of life?” is like asking, “If there is no Master, whose slave will I be?” If the purpose of life is to become a submissive slave, then your meaning comes from flattering the ego of a person whom you should despise.”

- Dan Barker

“Here is the good news we atheists offer to the world:
There is no purpose of life.
It may sound counterintuitive, but that is truly great news! Life is its own reward. You should not want there to be a purpose of life. You are not a subject. You don’t have an assignment to live up to. You don’t have a cosmic task to accomplish. You don’t have a duty to fulfill. You are not being managed or judged by an overlord. Unshackled from the chains of a master, you are truly free to live…”

- Dan Barker

Bible Arguments (7)

By DeYtH Banger

“Life is not driven by purpose; purpose is driven by life. You don’t have a purpose-driven life; you have life-driven purpose.
If you are still religious and are struggling with “what it all means,” then here is a purpose: get rid of the problem. Start a slave rebellion. Depose the dictator. Live your own life. In my books Losing Faith in Faith and Godless, I tell the story of how I went from evangelical preacher to atheist. It is not my task here to explain why I and millions of other good people do not believe in a god or an afterlife. I describe it all in great detail in those books. My point here is to show that whatever you think about the conclusions of atheists, you can’t claim that we lead empty, meaningless lives.”

- Dan Barker

“I dedicated my life to the service of my imaginary lord Jesus. I now see how thin and artificial the pretense was. Imagining that doing nothing is actually meaningful, I gained immense unearned respect from congregants who desperately wanted someone else to tell them how to live, how to think, how to find the purpose of their lives. There would be no shepherds without sheep. Like Rick Warren, I found a “calling,” a “purpose-driven life,” due to the fact that so many people think purpose must come from outside themselves.”

- Dan Barker

“It wasn’t until I got out of the master-slave ministry that I learned what real purpose is. Real purpose comes from solving real problems, not phony problems like “how can I be saved?” When I knew I would be leaving the ministry, after nineteen years of preaching, I had a concrete problem. I needed a job. I often hear from other clergy with the same dilemma: they have happily jettisoned their faith, but what do they do now? They spent years doing nothing of any real purpose: preaching, teaching, organizing worship, counseling parishioners, evangelizing, missionizing.”

- Dan Barker

“As I wrote in Godless, some of them end up in education, such as teaching philosophy, or go into social work, which are fields commensurate with their experience. Some go into sales—a different kind of evangelism. Some start their own business. But people are not cats: it is not easy to land on your feet when you have been turned upside down.”

- Dan Barker

“ “That’s it. I’m outa here.” It was like growing up and leaving home all over again,23 though this time I was actually glad to get out of the house. I could leave the ministry because I had a job, a way out, a purpose-filled life.
During those six months on hold, I had practically memorized the 68000 manual. My work was on the user interface, so I had to know what everyone else was doing. I had to see the big picture. Evangelism—
inviting people to become servants—was a small picture. I never knew a real job could be such a blast.
That project ended in about a year, so I needed another job. I heard that Safetran, a company that builds dispatching systems for the railroads, was hiring programmers. I drove to Cucamonga for the first real job interview in my life. (I didn’t have to interview for any of my earlier pastoral positions. I was invited to those churches, and all I had to do was accept.) I had limited experience and no degree in computers—I didn’t mention I had been a preacher—but the manager was impressed that I had programmed in assembly language.”

- Dan Barker

“I never preached about homosexuality during my entire ministry. We were all sinners, I believed, so why single out any group? But now, suddenly, it did matter. I had something important to say, and it wasn’t about insulting the “holiness” of a god by “choosing” a lifestyle that is forbidden by the bible. It was about offending humanity. God may be a delusion but the intolerance and harm that comes from faith is real. Religious discrimination is something actually worth preaching against and the lack of fairness is a noble problem to tackle.”

- Dan Barker

“I love that state of uncertainty when you know you have a problem that can be solved but you haven’t got there yet. I had felt that way when I was struggling with the question of the existence of God. I didn’t give up. “Something is wrong, and I can figure this out,” I often repeated. The brain goes full-speed ahead attacking the problem, then it backs off, looks around, combs the memory banks for similar or parallel situations. It gets ravenous for data, scavenging for clues. “Don’t give up, don’t give up. There is something to learn here.” After running out of ideas, you put it aside, sleep on it, try to sneak up on it laterally. During times like that, life definitely has purpose.”

- Dan Barker

“As the server task problem showed, sometimes simplicity is better than complexity. A universe with a god is more complicated than one without it. In order to fix all the bugs in the God task—the absence of evidence, the problem of evil, the lack of agreement among believers, the lack of a coherent definition, the uncertainty of the interpretation of unreliable holy books, the oppression of women and minorities and heretics, the failure of prayer (flag not being reset?), the dangers of sectarian divisiveness, and so on—believers need to cobble together inelegant Rube Goldberg kluges, apologetics, theologies, and theodicies to keep it clunking along. But if we can excise the God task and simply say, “No thanks, I’ll handle it myself,” things will run much more smoothly. A radical faithectomy can work wonders on a sick system.
We don’t need a God task to hand us our purpose. If you think purpose comes from a holy messenger who hands you a platter with a note saying, “Do this,” what happens when the communication breaks down? What happens when your requests are ignored? What happens when you realize that the scripture is a corrupted database? What if the messenger gets sick or dies? What do you do when you learn your religious leaders have been lying to you and your “master” is just a fiction? Is your life wasted? Are you nothing? Are you just a Frankenstein monster needing an outside spark to make you move?”

- Dan Barker

“Rick Warren is not the only Christian author who thinks we need to search for purpose outside of ourselves. Televangelist Joel Osteen, pastor of the huge Lakewood Church in Houston, puts down the human race with similar words: “God is in control and he has a great plan and purpose for your life. Your dreams may not have turned out exactly as you’d hoped, but the bible says that God’s ways are better and higher than our ways.”24 This simplistic rah-rah “just trust God” inspirational writing is supposed to make believers feel better, not by offering any practical advice, but simply by saying the words they want to hear. No matter what happens in life, somehow, God’s “purpose” (whatever that is) will magically occur. Isn’t that wonderful?
Compared to unsophisticated preachers like Warren and Osteen, the philosopher and Christian apologist Dr. William Lane Craig is much more informed and articulate, but he is just as wrong. In his book Reasonable Faith, Craig claims that if purpose is not “ultimate,” it is worthless. “If each person passes out of existence when he dies,” he asks, “then what ultimate meaning can be given to his life?” He replies with the non sequitur, “Thus, if there is no God, then life itself becomes meaningless. Man and the universe are without ultimate significance.” How does it follow that if there is no “ultimate significance,” life is meaningless? Craig doesn’t make the connection. He seems to be confusing meaning with “ultimate meaning” (whatever that is). He thinks we are hammers. This is very much like Rick Warren conflating the two different usages of purpose.”

- Dan Barker

Bible Arguments (8)

By DeYtH Banger

““For if there is no God, then man’s life becomes absurd.” What does absurd mean? “It means that the life we have is without ultimate significance, value, or purpose.”25 So life is absurd if there is no ultimate meaning, but life lacks meaning because without God it is absurd. He is talking in a circle. According to believers like Craig who are unhappy with blunt reality, life needs to be more than it is, otherwise it is absurd, and since we can’t possibly allow life to be absurd, then life must be more than it is! As an atheist, I think that is absurd.”

- Dan Baker

““If God does not exist,” he continues, “then you are just a miscarriage of nature, thrust into a purposeless universe to live a purposeless life.” If we don’t believe in God, “all we are left with is despair.” Craig, being religiously colorblind (see chapter 3) and unable to imagine what motivates abolitionists, seems not to realize that most atheists indeed live rich lives of value, meaning, and purpose that is grounded in objective reality. He shows that he does not grasp the difference between purpose of life and purpose in life: “Only if God exists can there be purpose in life.” That is simply sophomoric, a miscarriage of reason. Whether God exists or not, there is purpose in life.”

- Dan Baker

“Craig creates a false dichotomy: “It seems to me positively irrational to prefer death, futility, and destruction to life, meaningfulness, and happiness. As Pascal said, we have nothing to lose and infinity to gain.” Does he really imagine we atheists prefer death, futility, and destruction? Does he seriously think that even if the universe is ultimately purposeless we nonbelievers are not leading meaningful and happy lives while we are on this planet?
“Only here, in intimate communion with one’s Creator, does man find authentic existence.” There’s another phrase Craig fails to define. If you exist, aren’t you authentic? Claiming that atheists have “inauthentic existence” is like labeling someone an “illegitimate child,” and we know what the word for that is. “Authentic existence” apparently means “believing in God,” though the connection is not clear. Is eternal more authentic than temporal? Is longer more authentic than shorter? Is credulity more authentic than skepticism, or faith more authentic than doubt? Are Christians the only real humans? Are the rest of us artificial and cheap? If a serious philosopher is going to make such claims, he should explain and defend them Craig’s only explanation is to preach: “This is the horror of modern man: because he ends in nothing, he is nothing.” I have rarely read a more pathetic sentence. Does Craig really think that anything short of eternal is nothing? My life of learning, loving, parenting, helping, and enjoyment counts for nothing? Our entire lives of purpose, productivity, and morality are just a “horror”? Speak for yourself, Dr. Craig.”

- Dan Baker

“Peter Hitchens, the believing Anglican brother of the late Christopher Hitchens, believes like William Lane Craig that there is something wrong with the attitudes and personal choices of atheists, creating the same false dichotomy. In November 2012, I participated in a debate in Oxford, England, put on by the prestigious Oxford Union Society.26 The famous skeptic and author Michael Shermer, philosopher Peter Millican, and I teamed up against mathematician…”

- Dan Baker

“After Shermer and I made our statements, Hitchens took the floor. He immediately admitted he had no proof or evidence for God, but then turned to us atheists (Richard Dawkins was sitting right behind us) and continued with an outrageous ad hominem accusation…”

- Dan Baker

“We had better do it now. We atheists do want our loved ones to live on, but we are honest and courageous enough to admit that our personal desires do not alter the reality of death. We atheists
do want purpose in the universe, and in fact we do have it, in our personal lives, not in an empty cosmic “purpose of life” for which you admit there is no evidence. We atheists do want our actions to have more than their immediate effect—not an irrelevant cosmic effect, but a long-lasting effect in the world where we live.”

- Dan Baker

“Most believers think the mere material world can’t have purpose. Our lives must be directed from outside in order to have meaning, they preach. They imagine that the spiritual, whatever it is, is superior to the natural. They view the natural world as low and debased, while the supernatural is lofty and sublime.
It is not just believers from the Abrahamic tradition who feel this way…”

- Dan Baker

“The world has been infected with a malady that makes us blind to spiritual reality and deaf to the voice of Shiva. “In India, the quest for God is a life-time journey,” Shankara says. “You don’t do this as a summer crash course.” It is only with great difficulty and dedication that some masters over the age of sixty (like himself), under the skillful tutelage of earlier masters, have been able to take the long journey approaching the state of moksha where the self is completely obliterated and can glimpse the true reality that we are more than just “puny biophysical organisms.””

- Dan Baker

“You are an animal.
We are all animals. We are indeed, as you write, puny biophysical organisms, and that is enough. It is more than enough. It is wonderful. It is the reality of who we truly are.
When you come back down the mountain, you will arrive at the state before you became sick, and stop deny ing your true human nature. You will no longer need to pretend that we exist in a supernatural plane. You will abandon the delusion that we are transcendent beings and rejoin the human race, proudly affirming the awesome fact that we are living material beings. We are not spirits. We are not souls. We are animals…”

- Dan Baker

“Since I created the gods—since we human animals created the gods—we can simply uncreate them. We don’t need to be born again. We merely have to recognize and embrace who we were when we were first born…”

- Dan Baker

““But when you say we are not just animals,” I countered, “you are admitting that we are at least animals.” Shankara and I agree that we are “puny biophysical organisms,” but he thinks we are also something above and beyond our physical existence. Just like the apostle Paul, Shankara says, “The body is just an outer covering which is cast off and dead.” And that is what the whole theistic debate is about. Transcendence. My point is that we should not deny who we actually are, no matter what we think about what else we might be. If you believe we are animals plus, that does not mean you think we are not animals. It means you would be ashamed to consider yourself merely an animal.
Transcendence doesn’t elevate us. It puts us down.
Being called an animal is not an insult. It is a compliment. We are very smart animals. We live our lives, our real lives, our only lives, in a physical world, the only world we know about. I don’t think there is another world—I am convinced there isn’t—but even if there were some metaphysical or transcendent sphere (yet to be discovered), it is irrelevant. Purpose comes from solving material problems in the material world, real problems in the real world
Does a raven ask itself, “What is the purpose of my life?” as it finds creative ways to obtain food? Do cats struggle with existential anxiety? Do pandas ask, “Why am I here?” I have read that elephants grieve, but do they wonder what happens after they die? Don’t they just live? Why can’t life be awesome on its own? Life is short and often difficult, but why cheapen it? Are we so insecure and unhappy that we must denigrate ourselves in order for life to “make sense”? Why can’t we human animals do like the others and simply live without pretense?
Religion is a refusal to face reality. It teaches us to be ashamed of who we are. It turns the head away in disappointment. In the mythical story of Adam and Eve, I don’t think eating from the tree of knowledge was a crime—the crime was seeing ourselves for who we really are and being ashamed: “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”28 Religion is the apron, a mask to cover our true natures. It teaches us to distrust our own purposes.”

- Dan Baker

“There is purpose in life. Purpose does not come from magnifying the glory of a master, whether natural or supernatural. It comes from striving to make a better place of this world, the real world, the only world we have…”

- Dan Baker

“It was biological.
We are animals, after all. We come prepackaged with an array of instincts inherited from our ancestors who were able to survive long enough to allow their genes—or closely related genes—to be passed to the next generation because they had those tendencies. An individual who does not care about falling babies is less likely to have his or her genes copied into the future…”

- Dan Baker

“Prayer is inaction. Believing in God is not the way to be good…”

- Dan Baker

“Should we follow a code instead? Is morality a lookup list of prescribed rules? Can it be reduced to obeying orders? Should you “always let your bible be your guide”? If so, why do believers disagree about moral issues, and why do so many of them act immorally…”

- Dan Baker

“Mere Morality is a model, a framework that can help us visualize what we are doing when we make moral choices. Have you ever seen one of those cartoons where the character is trying to make a decision with a devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other? We often find ourselves torn between what we want to do and what we feel we should do. Since there are no angels or devils, I suggest we replace the image of those silly supernatural symbols of “good and evil” with something else. Instead of cartoon characters competing for your attention, picture instinct on one shoulder, law on the other, and reason in the middle…”

- Dan Baker

“None of them is good or bad. Actions are what we judge to be good or bad, and your moral minds are guides that help you do the judging…”

- Dan Baker

“Daniel Dennett might call this an “intuition pump,”3 a tool for critical thinking.”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments (9)

By DeYtH Banger

“Many of our biological instincts are nurturing, but some are thoughtlessly violent. Reasoning may be based on untested premises or inadequate information, resulting in bad conclusions. Many laws derive from primitive tribal fears or the privilege of power and may have nothing to do with morality.”

- Dan Baker

“Speaking about morality, good is the absence of harm. To be good is to act with the intention of minimizing harm
What else is meant by morality? Morality is not a huge mystery. Ethics is simply concerned with reducing harm. (There is a difference between ethics and morality—one is theory and the other is practice—but most people informally use the two words as synonyms, so I will too. Some nonbelievers don’t even think we need the word “morality,” and they have a point, but I am using the word in the informal sense of “how should we act?”) Morality is not a code.”

- Dan Baker

“It is not pleasing an authority figure. It is not “bringing glory” to a god, religion, tribe, or nation. It is not passing a test of virtue. It is not hoping to be told someday that “you are my good and faithful servant.” Humanistic morality is the attempt to avoid or lessen harm.”

- Dan Baker

“I think most believers are good people. Although religious doctrine is generally irrational, divisive, and irrelevant to human values, some religions have good teachings sprinkled in with the dogma, and many well-meaning believers, to their credit, concentrate on those teachings. Surveying the smorgasbord of belief systems, we notice that they occasionally talk about peace and love. Who would argue with that? Sermons and holy books may encourage charity, mercy, and compassion, even sometimes fairness. These are wonderful ideas, but they are not unique to any religion. We might judge one religion to be better than another, but notice what we are doing. When we judge a religion, we are applying a standard outside of the religion. We are assuming a framework against which religious teachings and practices can be measured. That standard is the harm principle. If a teaching leans toward harm, we judge it as bad. If it leans away from harm, it is good, or at least better than the others. If a religious precept happens to be praiseworthy it is not because of the religion but in spite of it. Its moral worth is measured against real consequences, not orthodoxy or righteousness.”

- Dan Baker

“Mere Morality is all about. (“Do unto others” is decidedly not a good rule for masochists, psychopaths, or people with kinky sexual preferences, religious obsessions, or simply bad taste.) Religious groups such as Buddhists, Jains, and Quakers that are known for their ideals (if not always practices) of pacifism are more moral than groups such as Christian Crusaders, Muslim suicide bombers, and Kamikaze pilots, whose dogma has led directly to violence. We can make this judgment on the basis of lessening harm, which is a principle available to all of us.
So the good values that a religion might profess are not religious values. They are human values. They transcend religion, not in a supernatural sense, but in the natural sense that they are available to everyone, regardless of our particular religious heritages or choices.”

- Dan Baker

“What day of the week you should worship, how many times you should say a certain prayer, what religious texts you should memorize, how you should dress, whether women should wear jewelry or makeup in church (or whether their bodies should be seen at all), what words you can say or pictures you can draw or songs you can sing, what books you should read or music you should listen to or movies you should watch, what foods you should eat, whether you can drink alcohol or caffeine, whether women can take positions of leadership, if and how women should submit to men, how women should control their own reproductive future, who your children are allowed to date or marry, how gays, nonconformists, heretics, or infidels should be dealt with, how a class of privileged leaders (clergy) should be treated or addressed or whether they should be allowed to marry, how much of your money or time is demanded by the religion, how many times a day you should pray, what words should be said or what direction you should face during prayer…”

- Dan Baker

“If religious teachings cause unnecessary harm—and they often do—they are immoral and should be denounced. If we play C. S. Lewis’s game and separate out common human morality, Mere Morality, from religion, nothing is left worth praising on ethical grounds. (We might appreciate religious art or music, for example, but this is irrelevant to morality.) Turn it around and strip each religion of its weird supernatural and ritualistic uniqueness and what is left, if anything—such as peace, love, joy, charity, and reciprocal altruism—is Mere Morality, or humanistic goodness…”

- Dan Baker

“Since harm is natural, not supernatural, its avoidance is a material exercise. Harm is a threat to survival. It is disease, predators, parasites, toxins, invasion, war, violence, theft, parental neglect, pollution of the environment, excessive heat, cold, lack of food, water, shelter, and adequate clothing, unsafe working conditions, accidents, drowning, natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, volcanos, winds, storms, lightning, mudslides, coastal erosion … you can add to this list, but whatever you add will be natural.”

- Dan Baker

“Intention is crucial when determining the legality or morality of an action. If you trespass on my property and trample through my garden while fleeing from an attacker, I will not press charges. If you do it because you hate my family, then I will press charges. In the first case, I can see that my garden is minimal collateral damage in the overall assessment of harm. In the second case, it is maximal harm, in context…”

- Dan Baker

“People who are selfish, greedy, and egotistical may indeed be trying to minimize the harm to their own personal lives, but if they are ignoring the harm their actions cause to others, they are not acting morally. That is what morality means. That is why we have laws against theft, homicide, battery, abuse, mayhem, and perjury. Mere Morality does not mean we should completely ignore our own interests; it means we should take all harm into account. If an action results in a harm that is much greater to yourself than to another person or persons, then it is not immoral for you to protect yourself. That’s why we allow for the motive of self-defense in a trial.”

- Dan Baker

“Harm is still harm, whether it is social or not, but your body is your body, and if you are mentally healthy, and if your action does not affect others, and if you can cover your own health expenses, then harming yourself is a health issue for you alone, not a moral issue for society. It should be none of my business what you do to yourself. (Although, if you are my friend, I may try to talk you out of it.)”

- Dan Baker

“…his own fingers (or some other body part, as Jesus encouraged in Matthew 19:11–125), that is certainly harmful and destructive, and may be unhealthy, but the act is only immoral if it affects other people—and it might indeed, especially if others are dependent on that person. (In my case, as a professional pianist, it would certainly affect others.) If I know in advance that that man is intending to lose a finger, and I suspect there is no good reason for it, then I am the one faced with the moral question of whether I should try to stop him. I certainly want to keep people from harming themselves, and I think most of us feel that way.”

- Dan Baker

“Similarly, virtually all women who choose to have an abortion are making a mentally healthy and rational choice, a difficult decision for moral and health reasons. I’m not directly comparing a fetus to a finger, although most abortions occur when the fetus is smaller than the tip of your little finger. Contrary to the dogmatic opinions of the misnamed “pro-lifers,” abortion is not killing an unborn baby.”

- Dan Baker

“In my opinion, that is immoral.
Mental illness or instability are not “evil” or immoral. The consequences of the actions of mentally deficient people may indeed be harmful, but we put such people in the hospital, not in prison. It is a health issue, not a moral issue. For society, however, mental illness is indeed a moral issue because those who are entrusted with the authority to determine the fate of such individuals have to determine the course of action that results in the least amount of overall harm to society as well as to the individual involved…”

- Dan Baker

“Instinct and law prejudge your actions, but reason, the real-time investigator, can re-judge them, using the harm principle as the measure. All three of these tools, taken together, can make a powerful arsenal for moral decisions. For better or worse, they are all we have…”

- Dan Baker

“We now know that acts of charity and compassion actually boost pleasure chemicals in the brain, similar to how we feel when eating chocolate, listening to music, making love, or laughing. Why do you hold the door open for the person coming behind you? It’s partly learned common courtesy, but it’s more than that. You don’t know that person, and might not even like that person. It’s not just reciprocal altruism—“Listen, buddy, you better hold the door for me next time!”—because you would do it anyway. You would feel bad not doing it. Why? Part of it is pure instinct, part of it is chosen social cooperation, and part of it is the little chemical…”

- Dan Baker

“Thomas Jefferson was a deist, living just like an atheist with no religious practices, but believing there had to be some kind of starter god, or impersonal force that got everything going. The deists were the pre-Darwinian freethinkers, lacking a model for the origin of life. But Jefferson got it right about instincts, anticipating the theory of evolution by many decades. Charles Darwin famously wrote: “It has, I think, now been shewn that man and the higher animals, especially the Primates, have some few instincts in common.”

- Dan Baker
“Frans de Waal, in his book The Age of Empathy: Nature’s Lessons for a Kinder Society, gives many examples of nonhuman animals acting compassionately. Altruism is an evolved behavior that does not rely solely on having a “higher” brain that can construct formal moral philosophies.”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments (10)

By DeYtH Banger

“You might object that the appearance of animal morality is just a thoughtless expression of an automatic instinct and that we could also give numerous examples of animals not caring about each other. But we could say the same thing about humans.”

- Dan Baker

“Some people break into tears when they see cruelty to animals, and if you are like my sister-in-law Suzan, you will break into a rage…”

- Dan Baker

“We have many instincts—some nurturing, some violent—and they often conflict with each other. But Freud did not think the Id was moral in itself. He thought it was something for the Ego and Superego to control…”

- Dan Baker

“Daniel Dennett, in Freedom Evolves, writes that it makes no difference whether our moral impulses are evolved or learned. “[T]he theory that explains morality … should be neutral with regard to whether our moral attitudes, habits, preferences, and proclivities are a product of genes or culture.””

- Dan Baker

“…think “instinct” is purely biological or a learned habit, or a combination of the two, it comes down to the same goal: the minimization of harm to biological organisms
Craig Packer points out in his book Into Africa, that is because ‘we make it all up as we go along,’ whereas an ant has ‘every small instruction laid out in advance.’”13 Since none of the other animals have such a proportionately large and complicated brain, they are, as far as we know, unable to construct a formal moral philosophy, but this does not mean they lack altruism, empathy, or moral sentiments.”

- Dan Baker

“We can think about other people thinking about us thinking about their thoughts. (This is sometimes called Theory of Mind.) We can deliberate, compare, anticipate, contrast, imagine, and prioritize. We can run “what if” scenarios. We can refrain from acting and wait for more information. (That is one of the functions of the frontal lobe, which checks our actions in social settings. It is what keeps you from burping loudly at a wedding or funeral, for example.) We can investigate, read, and ask for help. We can search our memories for consequences to similar situations, past lessons, previous mistakes.”

- Dan Baker

“…of the Unconscious, show that very often we simply “know” what to do intuitively, without deliberation. A hunch can be a signal from your lower biological brain to your higher consciousness that something is wrong, though you can’t put it into words. Your “gut feeling” happens somewhere beneath your conscious awareness, but it is no less important than reason. Instincts are a huge advantage, but Gladwell and Gerzinger also give examples of gut feelings gone wrong. Animal instincts are valuable not because they are always right but because they were advantageous most of the time when they were being naturally selected. “I’m not a textbook player. I’m a gut player,” President George W. Bush told Bob Woodward about his disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq. Gut feelings can go horribly wrong sometimes—especially when they are prompted by religion rather than evidence—because they are firing in a different environment from which they originally evolved.”

- Dan Baker

“Sometimes such actions result in two tragedies instead of one. Call for help. Don’t become a dead hero. Yet the fact that most of us have these automatic impulses to do good tells us something about our human nature..”

- Dan Baker

“Morality is not a code. It is a compass. A compass does not tell you where you are or where to go; it only shows you where north is. Think of north as the direction of less harm and south as more harm. If your actions are heading more to the north, then you are acting morally. Of course, you can’t always travel directly north—the terrain is often complicated and actions can conflict with each other, and you might have to detour east, west, or even south for a while—but if you intend your general path to go more northerly than southerly, your journey is moral. (No offense to my friends in Australia, Brazil, and South Africa! If you live below the equator, then head south.”

- Dan Baker

“I]n no instance has a system in regard to religion been ever established, but for the purpose, as well as with the effect of its being made an instrument of intimidation, corruption, and delusion, for the support of depredation and oppression in the hands of governments.””

- Dan Baker

“In his book The Moral Landscape, Sam Harris identifies the “well-being” of conscious creatures as the aim of morality. I think that is right. “Well-being” is perhaps a more positive way to characterize the harm principle, but it boils down to the same thing. All through Sam’s thoughtful book, when “well-being” is unpacked with real-life examples, they always involve the avoidance of some kind of harm or limitation. Well, you can’t be “well” if you are harmed.”

- Dan Barker

“The third moral mind, on the right shoulder, is not located in dead ancestors or individual consciousness, but in the social agreements formed by the large tribe to which we belong. Remember that I am not suggesting that law is actually one of your own minds: in a democratic society, humanistic law is a result of a collective mind (including yours) that expresses itself as social expectation or obligation. Unless you live alone on one of the moons of Saturn, the laws you encounter come from somewhere other than your own conscious mind.”

- Dan Barker

“They replace reason with faith. Reason shows us, for example, that there is nothing wrong with being gay, and if the bible says homosexuality is wrong, then the bible is wrong, not homosexuality. These people are free to have faith and live by their own rules. They are even welcome to try to persuade the rest of us to think like them, but in a secular society, they are not free to impose their theocratic beliefs on everyone else by law…”

- Dan Barker

“But I also know there are good reasons for the state to impose a law on how fast I drive on a road that is owned and used by all of us. I may not know all those reasons. They probably have to do with efficient traffic flow, public safety, and convenience. In the absence of a true emergency (such as rushing a heart attack victim to the hospital), I willingly surrender part of my moral decision-making to the collective mind of society…”

- Dan Barker

“What about stem-cell research, abortion rights, birth control, prostitution, polygamy, military draft, tax laws, nude beaches, animal leash laws, motorcycle helmet laws? What about laws based on religious principles? What sense does it make, for example, to outlaw same-sex marriage or a woman showing her face in public? Those religious laws are simply an attempt to legitimize primitive homophobia, sexism, and sectarian orthodoxy. A truly moral law would deal with such discrimination by aiming at the attackers, not the targets. When considering any law, I think we should simply ask, “What is the harm?” Bad laws increase harm. If following a law more often results in less harm, we can say it is a good law.”

- Dan Barker

“I am going to break the law, and I want all of you to witness. The god of the bible, if he exists, is an evil, immoral, selfish, arrogant, jealous, brutal, bloodthirsty bully, and if he created hell, he can go to hell. I am not saying “God Damn It,” I am saying “Damn God.” There. I just broke the Third Commandment. I took the name of the Lord Your God in vain. Are you going to have me arrested for blasphemy…”

- Dan Barker

“Thomas Jefferson concluded that “Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”20 It was originally a jumble of regional legal decisions based on common sense and precedent that roughly came together after a long evolution of trial and error. It is not based on written statutes but on the “survival of the fittest” ideas that had been naturally selected by experience. The prohibition of murder, for example, is (to this day in England) not based on “Thou shalt not kill” or any other statute, but on the legal decisions of ancestor judges amassed over time into a “common” understanding of how we should…”

- Dan Barker

“Look what happened with Harvard, originally a religious school founded by Calvinists to educate preachers (“dreading to leave an illiterate Ministry to the Churches”) that grew into a humanistic institution of liberal arts education. The seventeenth-century theocrats, at any rate, did not found the United States of America. It was a century and a half later when our actual founders, not wanting any part of the religious divisiveness of the earlier colonies, continued evolving into a secular democratic republic.”

- Dan Barker

“The constitution arose naturally from a group of people struggling to be free of authority, not to submit to rules. American citizens are not subjects.22 We are a proudly rebellious people…”

- Dan Barker

“…In Losing Faith in Faith and Godless, I describe the shortcomings of theistic morality, which is based primarily on a might-makes-right mentality. With its threat of eternal torture, inept role models, and a cosmic dictator who is praise-hungry, angry, and violent, the bible offers an ethical system that reduces to the morality of a toddler who fears and flatters the father figure. In most religions, behavior is governed by rules, but in real life behavior should be governed by principles.”

- Dan Barker

“…you don’t believe in God you have to be reminded of the punishment of the law? If you do believe in God you can simply say, “so help me, God,” and that is enough to warrant honesty. If you don’t believe in God, it is assumed you have less motive to tell the truth, the “pains and penalties of perjury” replacing the threat of “hell” to force you to be a good person.”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 11

By DeYtH Banger

““In a world without God,” Craig writes, “who is to say which values are right and which are wrong? Who is to judge that the values of Adolf Hitler are inferior to those of a saint? The concept of morality loses all meaning in a universe without God…. For in a universe without God, good and evil do not exist—there is only the bare valueless fact of existence, and there is no one to say you are right and I am wrong.”24 Well, yes there is, Bill. Hitler was wrong because he caused unnecessary harm. And many saints are wrong for the same reason.”

- Dan Baker

“Genocide is a moral duty? How can Craig know that if it would be wrong to do something “in the absence of a divine command,” it is only the divine command that makes it right or wrong? Moral actions, according to Craig, are not determined by actual consequences in the real world: right and wrong come from the decree of the dictator, not from measuring actual harm.
Craig thinks God has a loftier view of what causes harm than we do, so he cannot be judged, but then he goes ahead and judges him…”

- Dan Baker

“God, then it is equally fatuous for us to defend him. It is not up to us to ask for reasons; it is only God who decides. (I’m sure you understand that by talking about “God,” I am not agreeing he exists. If I were to say that the Big Bad Wolf is a despicable character, you would know that I am talking about a literary invention, not a real person, who would be bad if he existed.) When humans are acting under God’s command, according to Craig, then nothing they do can be immoral. If God orders it, the massacre of innocent children is a good and holy act…”

- Dan Baker

“If I think my Dad or the president or the pope screwed up, I will say so. If I think the god character depicted in the bible acted like a monster, I have the freedom and the right to condemn such actions. To do less would be to abdicate moral responsibility.
Blasphemy is a moral impulse.
Blasphemy is insulting or attributing evil intentions to God, which I just did. It is clear why church leaders would invent such a crime. Blasphemy undermines their authority. The old joke that “blasphemy is a victimless crime” doesn’t go far enough. Blasphemy is no crime at all. It arises from healthy human judgment.”

- Dan Baker

““Shut up and don’t ask questions. God is good, good, good, no matter what you think. God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.” No matter what crimes he commands or commits, including gross genocide against human families unknowingly trespassing on his holy property, we are to pretend, against all we consider decent and moral, that “God is love.”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 12

By DeYtH Banger

“Our God is good, because he told us he is good. New Yorkers are evil because they are offending his holiness and corrupting our tribe. If you judge our Lenape Lord to be evil, then you are committing blasphemy.”

- Dan Baker

“If we can’t judge God to be bad, then neither can we judge him to be good. To worship God is to judge God. If what look like “bad” actions of God might actually be good, then what look like “good” actions of God might actually be bad, and we are helpless to know the difference. When he tells us he is good, he might be lying, and if believers think he is not, they are judging him. If they can judge God, why can’t I? They say he is good by his decree. I say he is bad by his actions.”

- Dan Baker

“The bible preaches a pessimistic view of human nature. “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”28 There’s that intimidating word “glory.” Notice that biblical wrongdoing is connected not with real human suffering but with offending the deity. We are all bad: “All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”29 We all deserve to die: “The wages of sin is death.”30 Notice here that death is not viewed as a natural event but as a punishment for the crime of not glorifying the deity. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive.”31 Without Jesus, we are all doomed.”

- Dan Baker

“…the original sin transmitted to us through Adam. (I never thought of this when I was a preacher, but if “sin” is inherited, is it genetic?)
A humanistic view of human nature is neither negative nor positive. It is realistic and optimistic. We recognize that we all fall somewhere across a spectrum of characteristics and tendencies that are a mix of violence and empathy. Some will lean more toward “saint” and others toward “sinner,” but except for a few people at the far end of the curve who are truly mentally unhealthy, most of us are neither wholly “bad” nor wholly “good” by nature…”

- Dan Baker

“Unlike most believers, most humanists are optimistic about human nature. It’s not that we think we are perfect, or even perfectible, but that we can improve. Many individual genetic predispositions cannot be changed, or cannot be changed easily, but this does not mean that an individual cannot control his or her own actions in spite of those tendencies. This is where education, societal expectation, and humanistic law become useful.”

- Dan Baker

“They are unusual. They are shocking. Most of us, fortunately, are somewhere in the middle of the bell curve and live our lives outside of the headlines. Think of a horrible story you have read in the newspaper or seen on television. When a mother does something unthinkable to her children or a husband brutalizes his wife, what do you think? When a criminal commits a heinous act, what do you
say? If you are like me, you say, “What an inhuman thing to do!” We assume that those violent acts reported in the headlines do not reflect basic human nature. We know we are normally kind, empathetic, altruistic, loving, and moral, and that is what makes headlines grab our attention. It is good that most people don’t make it to those headlines. It is only the extreme deviations from the norm that catch our attention, and they shock us because they are not representative of who we really are.”

- Dan Baker

“If you are a believer, is that how you picture yourself? Are you desperately trying to restrain your malicious impulses? If you could get away with it, would you run around like a maniac, looting, destroying property, sexually assaulting, and causing bodily harm? Don’t you simply know that such behavior is a threat to survival? Most human beings who want a good life prefer less violence, less harm. Studies show that societies with less religion are better off,…”

- Dan Baker

“We can choose to be moral. Instead of making morality a huge mystery, searching for an “absolute standard” or list of rules or external ethical imperative or purpose-driven motivation or other excuse to treat people nicely, why not simply choose to be reasonable, moral, and kind to others? Paraphrasing my Mom: “If you want to be a good person, then be a good person.”

- Dan Baker

“Think about sexuality. The bible says that “God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). It is assumed that Adam and Eve were heterosexual, because they were commanded to “replenish the earth.” Jesus made the same assumption: “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said ‘for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (This is also sexist, from the male point of view.) In the bible, anything outside of binary heterosexuality is condemned as an abomination. (See Leviticus 20:13, for example.”

- Dan Baker

“Any identity that does not flip to one side of their toggle switch does not exist. This is a cultural color blindness resulting from religion, a failure to see the shades of reality we are looking at. Forcing homosexuals to live as heterosexuals is like me pretending that my garish red outfit was attractive. It is fitting that the gay community uses a rainbow as a symbol.”

- Dan Baker

“Think about evolution. The bible says, “God made the beasts of the earth after their kind,” and creationists interpret this to mean each species was formed independently. All of life is flat, started at the same moment, existing side-by-side, nothing related. How boring! When you can learn to see the beauty of evolution, the interconnectedness of all living things springing from the same ancestor, it opens up a whole four-dimensional spectrum. We can see ourselves in stereo, in context, as cousins to the other apes, as more distant relatives to every other species on the planet.”

- Dan Baker

“Richard Dawkins, in The Extended Phenotype, talks about this shift in perspective as we look at the natural world. He compares it to staring at a drawing of a Necker Cube, where your mind sees a box in one orientation and then surprisingly shifts to the other orientation. Nothing actually changes on the paper—it all happens in your mind—but it feels like something has changed. Two people can be looking at the same facts but “seeing” something entirely different. Fundamentalist creationists perceive a two-dimensional drawing with little depth or meaning, while evolutionary biologists see a three-
dimensional image, actually four-dimensional when you consider time.”

- Dan Baker

“A human being, like the human race, appears on the stage as a full person, they imagine. Adam was formed as a grown man, not a boy, child, baby, or fetus. To the true believer, there is no such thing as a half-developed person, just like there can be no half-soul. It is black or white, absolute, colorless. While the gestating human actually moves through a spectrum of developmental stages—in many of which the human is indistinguishable from other mammals—the religious anti-abortionists view the whole scenario not as a process but as an instantly completed creation, all involving a fully human person. The sperm contacts the egg and Presto, “You” are created. A zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus is the same as a breathing baby in their polarized brains.”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 13

By DeYtH Banger

“As comedian Bill Maher pointed out in one of his hilarious monologues,1 you can freeze a stem cell indefinitely, which is something you definitely cannot do with a baby. Even the bible, which equates life with breath, actually seems to agree with modern American law, which acknowledges that a human life begins at viability. I don’t know of any fundamentalists who add nine months to their age. But many believers, being religiously colorblind, can only conceive of “life” (a full person) as black or white, red or blue, all or nothing. Those of us who affirm a woman’s freedom to decide her own reproductive future equate a human life with personhood, seeing the earlier stages of development within a spectrum leading up to a precious baby whose arrival and existence we do cherish. Personhood is blue, while a zygote is red, with a prism in the middle.”

- Dan Baker

“In the beginning was the Turtle. The Turtle was swimming across an endless body of water. One day it dove to the bottom and brought up a lump of mud. When the mud baked in the sun, it became dry land. The land expanded into a vast area where trees grew. One day the Rabbit started kicking a blood clot by one of the trees until it formed into a human being.”

- Dan Baker

“Then I asked how many believed the creation myth of a later group of people, the Bronze Age Israelites, including the earth being created from a watery void, Adam being formed from the mud, Eve being taken from his rib, a talking snake, a talking donkey, a jealous genocidal war god named Yahweh (“my name is Jealous”), the Nile River turning to blood, and food falling from the sky. Most of the hands went up in that audience. They think the Turtle is false but the talking snake is true. They are polarized. They can’t see outside their own color.
All human groups have invented meaningful fables, but their fable is actual truth, they proclaim. The vast array of colorful creation myths collapses into “us versus them.” Truth versus lies. Some believers do appreciate the varieties of religious belief in anthropology; they just see them all as quaint but false, “out there,” while their belief is the one true faith. They can’t see themselves as part of the fabric, or their color as part of a spectrum, or their religion as having evolved from earlier antecedents. In the previous chapter, I talked about how law has ancestors, but the same is true with religion. If you can step back and see that your religion is just one cousin from a grandparent (as Christianity and Islam are descended mainly from Judaism), and also realize that the grandparent is a cousin to other religions descended from even earlier ancestors, you can perceive your faith not as a blunt stand-alone creation, but as a small part of a larger array. Your worldview becomes enriched. Gregory Riley does a nice job of illustrating the family tree (or branching river system) of world faiths in his book The River of God.”

- Dan Baker

“Look at your own beliefs the same way you look at the beliefs of others: from a distance. If you can’t do that, you are religiously colorblind.
Think about ethics. Most of us, including believers, act as if we embrace situational ethics in our daily lives, but most religions teach that there are absolute moral laws that must be followed no matter what, by command of a dictator. For example, since the Ten Commandments prohibit bearing “false witness” against a neighbor, most Christians think it is always wrong to tell a lie. Not just wrong, but sinful—a character flaw. However, while it is true that honesty is generally a good principle for social harmony, telling a lie is not always immoral. We do have laws against perjury, false advertising, contractual misrepresentation, impersonating an officer, identity theft, and so on, but it is generally not illegal to tell a lie.
Suppose a woman came to your front door, bruised and bleeding, saying that her husband is trying to kill her. You take her into your home, tend to her wounds, give her a place to stay for a while. Later, her husband comes banging on your door, shouting, “Do you know where my wife is?!” What do you do? As a good moral person, do you tell him the truth? I think all of us know that in that particular situation, the most moral thing to do is lie to that man. Otherwise, we risk greater harm to the woman. Telling that lie is not a sin: it is a good act of which you should be proud. But some Christians have told me that although they would indeed lie to the husband, they would feel bad about it and would later ask God for forgiveness. In their polarized brains, telling a lie is always sinful. Morality is absolute. Such colorblind moral thinking influences all ethical issues with which society is struggling, including stem-cell research, birth control, abortion, gay marriage, doctor-assisted suicide, war, state-church seperation…”

- Dan Baker

“Suppose I break into the home of a loving Christian family. This mother, father, and two children are faithful church attenders who read the bible and pray every day. They are generous, good people who help others and witness for their faith in Jesus. I tie them up and shoot the dog. I drown their cat in the bathtub. Then I set the house on fire and they all die. When the police ask me, “Why did you do it?” I reply: “No reason. The Devil made me do it.”

- Dan Baker

“In the biblical Book of Job we read about a good “blameless and upright” family man who was faithful in worship yet endured horrible torture at the hand of the God he loved. Satan, with God’s explicit permission, caused a huge wind to blow down a wall and kill Job’s ten children. All of his thousands of animals were killed. (The bible doesn’t say if he had a dog or a cat.) In Job 2:3 we find these words: “The LORD said to Satan, ‘Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason.’” So the police ask God, “Why did you do it,” and God replies: “No reason. The Devil made me do it. Then I said to the audience, “Raise your hands if you think the God of the bible is a moral monster.” Less than half the hands shot up.
That is proof that hundreds of people in that room had eyes to see, but saw not. The same crime by two different actors for the same reason is judged morally wrong when committed by only one of the actors. This is a psychological bias induced by religion. It is “looking the other way,” deliberately excusing the actions of a family member or other person you admire or love. It is what allows ministers and priests to get away with abusing children right under the noses of their parishioners who can’t imagine their beloved leader would.”

- Dan Baker

“Think about truth. Most fundamentalists demand that truth claims be absolute. In true polarized fashion, Jesus reportedly said, “All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” Christians are required to think that any answer between the extremes comes from Satan!”

- Dan Baker

“Servetus was murdered because of the misplacement of a preposition. His view of the nature of God was a different hue from Calvin’s. Servetus had discovered that the New Testament does not actually teach the concept of the Trinity. (Hence, the birth of modern Unitarianism where the deity is not “God in three persons” but simply “one God.”) There is only one verse in the bible that explicitly mentions the triune nature of God in three persons: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1 John 5:7). This is known as the Johannine Comma, because, as Servetus learned, it did not appear in any preceding Greek manuscripts of the biblical text. That verse had been interpolated into the more recent Latin Vulgate translation by the Catholic Church. Servetus eagerly brought this textual and doctrinal error to Calvin’s attention, naively imagining he would welcome another opportunity to correct the fallacies of Catholicism.”

- Dan Baker

“Fundamentalists have a desperate need to agree with each other 100 percent. To feel confident and unthreatened, the religiously colorblind need to know that all the members of their group are seeing the same color. “I appeal to you, brothers and sisters,” Paul wrote, “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of…”

- Dan Baker

“Truth is not a thing. Truth is simply a measure of how well a statement matches reality. The only thing that can be true or false is a statement, a proposition. Reality is not truth: reality is reality. If the sky is blue and I say, “The sky is blue,” then there is a strong correspondence between my statement and reality, so my statement would be true. If I say, “The sky is orange with black polka dots,” there is a very low correspondence, so my statement would be false. Of course, the sky is always changing color (it is sometimes orange), and is dark during the night, so “the sky is blue” is a true statement that has to be qualified. It is not absolute…”

- Dan Banker

“You have magically turned faith into fact, water into wine.
Truth is rarely black and white. (I wanted to write “never black and white,” but that statement would be absolute. I need to allow that I might be wrong.) Forcing truth to be absolute is like making the rainbow a solid color, which is no rainbow at all.
The next time you talk with a true believer, remember that fundamentalists are religiously colorblind. That’s what it means to be a fundamentalist. That includes the founder of Christianity. Jesus, if he existed, called himself “the Truth,” and said, “He that is not with…”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 14

By DeYtH Banger

“And if a nonbeliever replies honestly, “I don’t know why there is something rather than nothing,” believers will crow: “Aha! You don’t have an answer, and I do!” This is known as a “god of the gaps” argument, or an argument from ignorance. Any mystery can be “solved” without doing any work, simply by plugging the hole with magic.
But let’s be charitable and fair. On its face, the question is not necessarily religious. The motives of those who ask, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” may be honest and sincere, and even if not, that alone is no reason to dismiss their conclusion. Since something cannot come from nothing, their argument goes,…”

- Dan Baker

“If there is nothing, then there has to be something.
So, “can something come from nothing?” really means “can something come from something?” and that is a no-brainer. “Can something be what makes it different from what it is not?”
“Nothing” is just a word we use to identify absence. It is a concept, not a thing. The concept of absence can apply to things that are real as well as to things that are imaginary. The absence of Neanderthals and the absence of leprechauns arenot measured the same way, but they end up the same. Absence is absence.
Since “nothing” is a concept, and concepts are a result, not a cause, of a brain, asking if something can come from nothing is like asking if a brain can come from a thought it is thinking.”

- Dan Baker

“Why do we assume that reality, unmanaged, collapses to nothingness? Is it like gravity? The path of least resistance? From whence comes the great power of the void? (And if the void has this power, then it has something.) Perhaps it is the other way around: the great power of matter and energy is holding back the void. “Nature abhors a vacuum,” Aristotle thought.
But that all seems pretty silly, because something/nothing is not a proper yin/yang. They are not balanced opposites of a composite whole. If they were, then zero would be the reciprocal for every other number and math would be meaningless. But one thing we do know—and if there were a god, he/she would know it too—is that something indeed does exist, so there is no argument. Reality has not decayed into nothingness, or remained in such a state, not in the natural world or the supernatural world (if there is such a place). In fact, if there were truly nothingness, there would be no reality at all, natural or supernatural. We are aware of the reality that something does exist. That’s what reality means. Whatever the Theory of Everything (TOE) turns out to be, there will come a point where we simply have to refer to a brute fact—perhaps strings or branes or quantum wave potential, or something else. That is exactly what theists do when they refer to their brute fact of…”

- Dan Baker

“Theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking thinks our entire universe, not just particles, has arisen from the void. “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,” Hawking writes. “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

- Dan Baker

“Therefore, nothing exists. Putting the two bad-grammar arguments together, we could prove that God is Utter Nothingness…”

- Dan Baker

“In the beginning there was nothing. God said, “Let there be light!” And there was light. There was still nothing, but you could see it a whole lot better.”
—Ellen DeGeneres20
Notice that when we ask “can something come from nothing?” we are playing a loaded game similar to “who caused the thunder?” We are swallowing the claim that something, anything, always has to “come from” something or someone else. If we do that, we are forced to look for a “what” or a “who.”
When we ask “can something come from nothing?” what do we mean by “come from”? I think there are two normal usages of that phrase: impersonal and personal. In ordinary usage, “comes from” means something physical and impersonal. A house “comes from” lumber or stone or building material. The lumber comes from trees, the stone from quarries, the bricks from mud, the nails and hardware from metal. A tree comes from a seed, the stone and metal comes from physical processes in the earth and the stars. And so on. These are all sufficient answers. So asking where the universe “came from” in that sense would be asking for the location of a huge quarry or forest of materials from which the construction materials…”

- Dan Baker

“…cause of its own existence and even the cause of the existence of God. (Not supernatural, but “naturalsuper.”) I have no reason to believe that contrived scenario, but it is no less fantastic than theism…”

- Dan Baker

“God is a spirit.
—John 4:24
There is no good reason to believe in a god, but if such a being exists, he also should ask himself, “Why am I here? Why is there a god instead of no god?” Most believers will claim that a god would never ask where it came from because a god is a great spirit outside of nature. The “great spirit” is above the law: you can’t haul in the king for questioning, they insist. A spirit, they say, unlike us physical creatures, can indeed exist without an explanation, timeless, causeless, not needing a frame of reference or context. They imagine that there are actually three states of existence: nothing, something, and spirit. It is spirit that mediates between nothing and something, they claim. Spirit can cause something to come from nothing. God was looking around one day, saying, “There is nothing, and I don’t like it, so I am going to turn nothing into something. Fiat lux ex nihilo. Lo, behold, now something exists!”

- Dan Baker

“A spirit, whatever it is, must be either something or nothing. If it is not something, it is nothing.
By the way, if God is defined as “a spirit,” then spirit is something that God is made of. So spirit is not God. It is something more basic, otherwise God could not be “a spirit.”
Some believers will reply that a spirit is indeed “something,” but it is not “something natural.” The question “can something come from nothing?” really means “can something natural come from nothing?” The supernatural or spiritual realm (which they have conjured out of nothing) is exempt from the question, they insist. Their three states of existence really are: nothing, nature, and spirit. We are natural creatures asking a natural question—a question about the entire notion and existence of “natural”—and the only sensible answer, they claim, must come from outside.”

- Dan Baker

“If nothing comes from nothing, and if God came from nothing, then God is nothing.
Most believers insist that that is equivocating. We can’t compare God and the universe like that. God is a special case: he is great and personal and powerful and, unlike the impersonal lifeless universe, he has the ability to create himself. But how does that help their argument? If they say that “nothing comes from nothing” really means “nothing except God-who-is-great comes from nothing,” well there you go. They are back to question begging, inserting the conclusion into the premise. What could be a clearer example of circular logic? If you already believe in a god before you make the argument, then you don’t need the argument at all. It should be discarded. If believers agree that they don’t need the argument, but think that we atheists do—as a tool of evangelism—then they still need to convince us to embrace their “except God” qualification before we can get the argument off the ground, and if we did, we wouldn’t need the argument because we would no longer be atheists.”

- Dan Baker

“He is the Creator. He is all-powerful. The king does not ask “who is above me?” God is “I am that I am” who needs no explanation.
But when believers say God is “big” and “powerful,” what do they mean? Those are words of dimension, force, and time. Can the word “big” mean something without measuring along dimensions? Can the word “power” be understood without plotting work across a span of time? If God is truly outside those dimensions, then what does it matter if he is called “big” and “powerful”? Those words have no meaning outside of the natural world, if it is possible to be “outside” of the natural world.”

- Dan Baker

“We may as well say “God is bliphish and pomthical.” God talk is nonsensical. He is the holy iDot.
If God is truly outside of somethingness, he is nothing at all…”

- Dan Baker

““Without God, We Are Nothing.” Pell was the Archbishop of Sydney. Today he is Number 3 at the Vatican, as the prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, Pope Francis’s new finance ministry. If anyone is an expert in the faith, it would be “His Eminence Cardinal Pell.” (I couldn’t bring myself to use that title: he called me “Dan,” so I called him “George.”) During the debate, he used the word “spirit” and “spiritual” a number of times, so during cross examination, I asked him this question:
Dan: Can you define for us, using positive terms, what is a “spirit,” and how that would differ from nothing at all?
George: I just said that I can’t define “God,” but I can say something useful about “spirit.” I believe in the reality of love. I believe it’s a spiritual quality. I believe honor is something that is real. Disgrace is real. Forgiveness is real. Something spiritual is invisible, but sometimes it can be very powerful. The love of a husband and wife, the love between parents and children, they are probably the most important realities in many people’s lives. They are spiritual realities.
Dan: Let me follow up. I can define all of those things, like love, family, and feelings, in purely natural terms, as functions of an organism. But why were you not begging the question by saying that the definition of “spiritual” is love, which is spiritual? I want to know what it is. Does it occupy space? Does it occupy time? Does it have a weight? Can you measure it along a dimension? How would you know that your “spirit” is not just a concept as opposed to an actually existing thing in reality?
George: Well, you can’t measure a spirit. It is certainly not material. But the examples that I have given are very real and very powerful. Once there was an Australian poet who said that sometimes people can be at a concert and be like dogs at a concert. They hear every sound but have got no understanding of the music, because the music is something that is spiritual and beautiful and real. They can’t be reduced. They are connected with physical activities, but they can’t be reduced to those physical activities.
So I’m a dog, but I take that as a compliment. Notice that Pell said “spirit” is immaterial and invisible and can’t be measured, but it has power. Does he not know that power is measured materially? He sidestepped telling us what a “spirit” actually is. When believers are asked to define what “spirit” actually is—not to list synonyms like ghost, vision, or poltergeist; or attitudes like enthusiasm, love, emotion, or determination; but to describe the actual substance of the entity—they always define it by what it is not: intangible, noncorporeal, immaterial, ineffable, non-natural. (They might even say “the spirit is the ethereal essence.”) They never tell us anything positive. ”

- Dan Baker

“Even if spirit does exist in some unknowable way—in spite of my impertinence in asking for a definition—what do believers mean when they say it is “outside” of nature? Exactly where is that? If a spirit is outside of nature, it still must be somewhere, in a region “beyond.” And that is still a place. Something might indeed be outside our own observable universe in the wider cosmos, but how can anything be outside of nature? Universes within the multiverse would certainly be outside of each other, but they would still be part of the natural cosmos. If we don’t have a coherent definition of “outside of nature,” then it is meaningless to suggest that that is where the spirit or supernatural exists.
Some think that to be outside of nature is to be in another dimension. But that is incoherent. Dimensions are used to measure natural things. Dimensions are what we mean when we say something is natural: the object occupies space and time, which are charted in four dimensions, at least. The amounts of space and time that an object occupies are measured along those dimensions compared to other objects, or the distance between other objects, which…”

- Dan Baker

““Can something come from nothing?” might be unanswerable because it is unaskable. Logically, mathematically unaskable…”

- Dan Baker

““What is s/0?” Don’t even try to reply. It is not a valid question.
The reason we cannot divide by zero—the reason it is a nonsensical question—is because “divide” means to “share.” It’s where we get the phrase “divvy up.” How can three children share twelve cookies? By giving four cookies to each child. But if you don’t have any children who want the cookies, then it makes no sense to talk about sharing the cookies. You can only share (divide) when you have a positive nonzero number of divisors (children). If the number of numerators (cookies) is negative, we are talking about sharing a debt, which is the same thing in obverse. If the number is zero, we can’t…”

- Dan Baker

“Ultimately, when the cause or source of the cosmos gets down to the simplest brute fact—when the divisor finally shrinks to one—the question will be “what is something divided by one?” The answer will be “itself.” Since believers think “God divided by one” is a valid question while “God divided by zero” is not, why do they not allow me to think the same of the cosmos?
There actually is a sneaky way to do an end run and “divide by zero” without causing a crash, and that is to divide zero by itself. This is a trick because we can’t actually divide by zero, and would never need to, but based on the axiom that any number divided by itself (n/n) is 1, we might logically (not mathematically) conclude that 0/0=1. This checks out because 1x0=0. So if 0/0=1, then “nothing from nothing” equals something. Something from nothing. If nothing truly existed (0/0), it would be something…”

- Dan Baker

Bible Arguments 15

By DeYtH Banger

“"No one has ever seen God.”
—John 1:18
Many of my debate opponents agree with me that there is actually no evidence for a god. If there were, we would not be having the debate. No one would be asking, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” because there would be better ways to argue. If there were truly evidence for a god, they would put it on the table. By now someone should have won the Nobel Prize for pointing out such evidence.“

- Dan Baker

"They simply assert that their god hypothesis (or presupposition, as some theists honestly phrase it) is the best explanation for our current lack of knowledge. This is an argument from ignorance, not evidence.
Granting the lack of evidence, some believers come back with the brilliant parry: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” So there! Since we atheists cannot absolutely prove that their supernatural god does not exist, they can pretend to be justified in maintaining their belief in what might be true, what is true to them by faith or presupposition. But, then, since no one can prove to me that leprechauns do not exist, can I assert that they do? Look at a box of Lucky Charms! If the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, can you argue that I should stop believing in leprechauns? Of course you can. The absence of evidence is not proof of absence, but it is certainly evidence of absence. Absence is not a thing, but evidence of absence definitely is a thing. You can hold it in your hand.”

- Dan Baker

“If something truly does not exist, the only possible evidence for its nonexistence would be the absence of evidence for its existence where we should expect it to be. Richard Dawkins points out in The God Delusion that “a universe with a God would look quite different from a universe without one.” So far, conducting a comprehensive scientific search of the structure of the universe—certainly more thorough than any bomb squad—the chart has come up empty. We have evidence that God does not exist. We don’t have proof, but it is safe to go back in the building Why are theists free to say leprechauns do not exist but atheists are not free to say the same about God? Well, because they believe in God and not in leprechauns. When Anselm concluded his famous ontological argument, thinking he had neatly proven the existence of God using mere words (which truly is something from nothing), he couldn’t resist making a prayer with a jab at us nonbelievers: “Why, then, has the fool said in his heart, there is no God (Psalms 14:1), since it is so evident, to a rational mind, that you do exist in the highest degree of all? Why, except that he is dull and a fool?”29 If anybody was dull, it was Anselm.”

- Dan Baker

“I think most believers are kinder than Anselm and would never stoop to name-calling or hurl insults, like the bible does, in order to belittle opposition or score a rhetorical point against atheists. I think most honest believers who truly wrestle with definitions and assumptions can admit that we atheists are just as committed to clarity as they claim to be. We disagree, but disagreement is not a crime. If more believers would respect the motives of atheists, wouldn’t that be something, from nothing.”

- Dan Baker

“The next day the lonely bird flies back over the sodden spot and sees that the anthill is gone. It glides further down the muddy riverbed and spots you, wandering alone, doing the only thing you know how to do, smelling around, moving some dirt. What if the bird were to yell down, “Stop it! It’s pointless. Your queen is dead. Nobody cares, don’t you see? You’re wasting your time. Nothing lasts forever.” Would you say, “Oh, sorry,” and just give up? Or would you say, “I am an ant. What else am I supposed to do?”
Would your life have meaning.”

- Dan Baker

“If God is using us to convey a “meaning,” then who
is he talking to? Are people and ants just piano keys that God plays to amuse himself?
In the case of the dots on the canvas and the marchers in the band, we do know there was a human designer, but in the case of life itself we do not know that. In fact, we now know that life is the result of impersonal evolution and is not intelligently directed or designed at all. Since it looks designed—since natural selection utilizing randomness is not intuitively grasped by our minds—we (some of us) make the mistake of imagining there was an intelligent meaning behind it all.”

- Dan Baker

“We don’t want to feel pointless. We want a stamp of approval, or a sense that our activities are directed by and pointing to something larger than ourselves. We don’t want to be mere dots on a canvas that could burn up, or ants that get washed away in a flash flood. We want to feel big, or a part of something bigger than just us, little us.
There is a silly scene in the movie Pee-wee’s Big Adventure where Pee-wee loses control and falls off his bicycle in front of a crowd of children. As he stands up he says, “I meant to do that.” That is very funny, but why? Because intention indicates meaning. It might also give dignity, depending on how you value bike-handling skills. What Pee-wee meant by “meant” (the meaning of meaning) was planning followed by intention followed by execution (hopefully followed by praise, or at least not ridicule). The humor in that scene comes from knowing that he was desperately trying to back engineer the process, saving face by making it appear that the accident was deliberate. He was attempting to instill meaning where there was none..”

- Dan Baker

“Every cell in your body contains “meaning” from your ancestors. (I put “meaning” in quotes because it is just information that is passed. It becomes meaning when we think about it.) Your ancestors were not talking directly to you, but like an artist, they created a product that speaks to the future…”

- Dan Baker

“The cosmos doesn’t care. A flash flood will destroy it all. There is no meaning to any of this.” Even if true, would they have stopped? Of course not. Humans do what humans do. My great-grandparents John and Angelita and Jack and Lizzie (from different diasporas) led meaningful lives, in both senses, from their point of view as well as mine. Even if they had had no grandchildren—and some people indeed lead meaningful childless lives by choice, enhancing and protecting the lives and genes of others—their life would have been their life, and that is beautiful all by itself…”

- Dan Baker

“We can indefinitely stack symbols upon symbols, concepts upon concepts, reaching up to an infinite God or down to nothingness, but it is all a trick of language. If it doesn’t ultimately refer to anything real, it is vacant vocabulary. “In the beginning was the Zord, and the Zord was with God, and the Zord was God,” the gnostic evangelistic John tells us in his first sentence. But what does that mean? A zord can be useful (like the word “word”), but only if it ultimately refers to something that actually exists—a referent to which the symbol of the symbol can point. At the end of the day an algebraic equation has to resolve to so many apples or kilometers, or it is just make-work. The “meaning of life” never resolves to anything real, but the “meaning in life” certainly does…”

- Dan Baker

“At that final point of our unavoidable destiny, there will be no Mockingzird in the Sky, no “Zord of God” calling down “I told you so.” It will all be over and forgotten—and since there will be no one left to do the forgetting, it will be truly unforgettable. Do you find that depressing? I find it exhilarating.
In the movie Annie Hall by Woody Allen, nine-year-old Alvy has stopped doing his homework, so his mother takes him to a psychiatrist who asks, “Why are you depressed, Alvy? “Well, the universe is everything,” Alvy says, “and if it’s expanding, someday it will break apart and that would be the end of everything! … What’s the point?”
“What has the universe got to do with it?” his mother asks. “You’re here in Brooklyn! Brooklyn is not expanding!”
Alvy and his mother are both right. There is no meaning in the cosmic picture, but there is meaning in the here and now. Here in Brooklyn.9 How do you feel about that? What can you do about it? You already know that your not-too-distant descendants will forget about you, or even if they don’t—even if you become astonishingly famous.”

- Dan Baker

“Live your own life. If you are reasonable and kind, you will discover that meaning is not handed to you from on high; it emerges naturally from your own life-driven purpose.”

- Dan Baker

Comedy (Bible)

Note: Little Explanation... this here is analysis of God by using comedy and reading the bible... so what you are seeing here from the "Comedy" it's analysis from page 1 up to 54 page... so the shit here is legit.

Comedy: Bible

By DeYtH Banger

Oh… I love it … I love this topic… it's not momma's boy… it's not a disease… it's not something from which people escape… the truth is

FUCK YOU
FUCK YOU
AND YES AGAIN FUCK YOU

FUCK RELIGION
FUCK RELIGIOUS PEOPLE
AND FUCK ALL THOSE FAT RELIGIOUS PRICKS
FUCK 'EM

SMALL
BIG
DISEASED
Imputated

All kinds of man kind, I went for five days in christian home it was kinda a hell… it's not the problem you don't listen… but you don't define freedom…

YOU CAN'T SAY
YOU ARE FREE TO GO
AND IN THE SAME TIME YOU SHOULD STAY AT LEAST 2 WEEKS A GUY GOES WOTH THEN A GUY COMES AND SAYS STAY AT LEAST MORE THAN 2 MONTHS THEN FEW FUCKS… AROUND… COME ALONG AND SAY… I HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE 2015…
2014… 2000…

OH FUCK YOU
FUCK THOSE WACKOS

I am okay… totally fine… I don't have need or feeling to sell my soul to invisible shit… totaly those bible words or whatever holy fuck it is… muscles or weak spot… fuck it… fuck bible… It's devil himself… also the definion of wacko is beliving in invisible objects and things… god is not different objects or things… if you got a group of christian and all see God deffirently… it's definetly not a free spirit shit… it's delusional full mastery… atheist can't become a theist… it's just not possible…

And okay if you gonna believe in God… you definetly need to cut off your weird vocabulary words… (it's definetly… devil himself… of flip shit mastery) stop being so chill (god is watching… and this does definetly mean that he is sadistic and a pervert)…stop being so nice (nice guys… finish last… P.S.: middle finger is my opener)

Probably my explanation is trying drugs or alcohol… the main reason is something… is broken in you… and also atheist… becoming theist… probably the main reason is the deeper need of "feeling and having the need to be part of a group."

And don't throw right now the bullshit that youvare a loner… and you go alone and you don't need anyone… if youbare believer… you got a pervert in your pocket… white… black… yellow… all types of colour get a sexual charge of sexual harrasment. I hate fat religious people… deeper there we see a person who is selfish… who eats too much and nothing cool about that… stop saying… fat people are strong…..

THEY ARE FAT
SWEATY AND LAZY

THAT'S THE TRUTH
AND RIGHT HERE I CALLED THEM ON THEOR BULLSHIT

WHO THA FUCK DECIDES WHICH AND WHAT… AND HOW SHOULD BE INEPRETATED... I FOUND OUT THAT I AM SELFISH AND AWFUL AND HYPROCITE
…

What we know from this is fuck off… my life… ky problems. The last thing on the list is becoming a schizophrenic… okay… invisible… force… ghosts

FUCKING GROW UP
OKAY

LOVE THY MOM
LISTEN TO THY PARENTS

HOW ABOUT BUTCHER THY GOD… WHY… MY DICK IS UP AND WANT TO RAPE THIS GUY OUT THERE… WHY BECAUSE IT'S A HELL OF A RIDE

I want to buy one of those bibles… and burn few of them… it's the big… cosmo… jokes…

Bible alll and everything is all about sacrafice and horrible shit and nothing really helping or fixing problems… so fuck religion on all bases…

YOU WANT FOUNDATIONS

If you get few horses… raped with huge big God… dicks… I am going to believe in God or lets say… the big God trick not the magician… devil trick is…

God is to start killing people who live house with a BIG BOWL OF FOOD… THOSE MOTHER FUCKERS NEED GOD… THOSE SELFISH IDIOSTIC… FUCKS NEED GOD… SKINNY GUY… FUCK YOU ON ALL BASES… I HATE THOSE FAT BEARDED GUYS WITH WACKY NAMES… FUCK EM… ONE BY ONE AND ALL OF THEM.

End of argument, fucking stop putting the good shot under God and the bad shit under somebody else…

GOD PLEASE MAKE ME BANG YOUR MOM

Comedy: Bible (2)

By DeYtH Banger

Oh Old Testament…. Oh this fucking Old Testament God shown in thy image of horrible beast.. and if we need to check out the essay or whatever those texts are… we are going to see that with that "same repeating bullshit"… "God"… "God"

THAT'S ONE OF THOSE BRAINWASHING TECHIQUES AND FUCK GOD AGAIN

WHY I LOVE THAT KINDA OF PROCESS

God let mankind name creatures… so bibke so far from my knowledge says that we have freedom… but religious people say that the New Testament is the beginning and the end of modern time…

MY QUESTION… IS DIDN'T YOU HAD ENOUGH FOOD AND WATCHED ENOUGH SPORT?

Religious people say that we don't have freedom…
So fuck um… first commandment…

Should be

1) You religious pricks.. ambigious… and full of fallacy... stop cherry pick the bible you either believe in all or in none.

What type of narrator that… creating a beast and then saying "it was good"… AND FUCK SIDEBACK RELIGIOUS INTEPRETATIONS

I was cut of yesterday by a religious person…Cut of from reading the bible… we are talking theist godlike level… Theist needs faith… faith is food and definetly nothing to do with understanding.

God is a human okay… I see down there under creation of "thy image" - shit…There I can see mankind signature! Fuck the word "said"… just too many times… you either accept cheating orFUCK OFF!
Okay… I definetly need explanation of how invisible force gets tired? Your omnicient … and you need a break… first of all so far bible is a huge fictional lie.. second of all… no answers at all and definetly the last thing on the table for doubling… is human signature we go right near the "seven day break".

SOME PEOPLE SAY BIBLE SAYS WHAT YO DO… AND WHAT NOT TO DO!

To be honest… it's not possible such a tribal fictional story… to have any type of help in modern times.

STOP REPEATING AND GOING ROUND.
. ROUND…. CIRCLE BULLSHIT
LORD… GOD.… HERE IS A SIGN

FUCK YOU!

Okay now multiply and get involved in sexuality then freedom off and then… we got strict rules… new testament goes as far as Jesus… get killed for us. Fuck you Jesus… I won't be in your place… first of all… because it's brainless… shit!

Fucked up shit, words… how about meeet FUCK YOU SCENARIO?
Such a horrible story… no intro of characters… horrible… plot and nothing really going about of characters… IF I WAS A PERSON WHO NEEDS TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE RESULT ON THIS SHIT IT WILL BE 0 OUT OF 10…

WHY?

Who tha fuck is Adah… jadal… it sounds definetly muslim bullshit… and also brain… wash shit.
Begat?
Fucked up narrator… back to story… back to where it was… I HAVE HUGE BOWL OF QUESTIONS!???

Where is… jadal.. abah… adah.. I mean… where are those fucks?
And who the hell gives you right to go back?
HOW ABOUT YOU GET MY FULL LEVEL OF DISAPROVAL?

Comedy: Bible (3)

By DeYtH Banger

So let me go with logic… sons and daughters 800 years… Adam… 130… what type of ironic God is this?

TAKE A BREAK… DEEP SHIT!
Seth 912 years old…
None ppssible okay… those numbers are wuite huge!
130 us okay up to 200… but "912"… quite huge!

Maahaael… fuck that guy… we are going total boost of family tree how about getting a dick?
Right against your mouth?
Full narrow family tree!
Now Jared 962 years… what type of bullshit is that?

THE LIST GETS BIGGER AND BIGGER
WE GPT A MIRACLES WALKING ON WATER… TURNING WATER INTO WINE… AND DEFINETLY THE LAST IS PREMISE OF ALCOHOLISM...

WHAT'S WRONG WITH JESUS… WRONG FATHER?
MOTHER GOT GANG RAPED AND NOW HE IS BECOMING A NEW HERO IN MARVEL COMICS?

OKAY I DEFINETLY LIKE JARED 962 YEARS HAS LIVED… IT'S HARD… TO IMAGINE… THE CREATOR OF HOLY BOOK IS A RICH WACKOOOO

A NEW HARRY POTTER ADVENTURE STORY

Why the helll… god has snart abd wise and witty shit… I hate that hero… he is invisible and vets tge best shit on the market. Total… wack job!

"The Earth was corrupt… before God" - What tha fuck… really corrupted before with violence… how is that possible?
He created the Earth and while doing that he decided to put little fun and let's sell some twist ans definetly by god I see thy author… aka mankind… also known as… human….

So creating something goes with huge bowl of insecurity?
Flesh?
Really?
Insulting first and second… we need to burn christians… their fucking flesh!

New names… new places… okay… you lost me… I DON'T CARE!
Habatu is left hand of Damatacus… how about fuck you?
I don't care… about left hands… I care about snakes talking and burning talking bush… we are talking extreme dose of drugs.

"Fear not Abraham… I am thy shield".. such a horrible line… you buddy you got dry sense
of humor.
Stars can't be numbered… stop cherry picking and don't say bull you christian pricks…

DEFINETLY "SHHHHHH"

"Darkness fell
Fowl went
Birds devide"

What is this?
- Poetry class?
Come be more serious.… I am not here to hear your less minded shit!

Hagar… shur.. i know those names old… fuck 'em… thy wrong! Abraham is 909… this is some kinda a bullshit and now comes circumsiced!

FUCK THIS SHIT!

Visions… big numbers of age… Sarai… strange names… strange characters… I still curious, who the hell has accepted the request for publishing this book?

Ishamael… 13 years old fuck… we got young fuck… we don't know how he become that age… probably he is a illustratotion for my dick, with little more purpose.
This Sodom… plot… soap opera… home… family drama shit!

FUCK ALL CHRISTIAN… FUCK EM… I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO WITH MADE UP HOLIDAYS AND GO INSANE LEVELS OF PARODY OF JESUS… MAKING CROSS ON CHESS… HOW FUCKED UP IS THAT… FATTY FUCK?

Comedy: Bible (4)

By DeYtH Banger

Definetly fat and wrong!
This here is walking semen, nothing insulting… nothing bad… that's biology. Go get clasess of knowledge!

THIS HERE IS MY CIRCLE OF FUCKING…

"“What is the point of my life?” This question cannot have haunted many people in earlier centuries; they were too busy scratching out a living, providing food and shelter for their families, fending off threats to their health and security. But now that we have pretty well solved the most pressing problems of staying alive, and have the free time to reflect on what it all means, we are assaulted at every turn by a flood of information about the apparently meaningful lives of a lucky few—doctors, judges, guitar heroes, sports stars, billionaires, celebrities, politicians, explorers of ocean depths, and conquerors of the highest mountains. If we can’t all have glamorous lives—if we can’t all be famous for even fifteen minutes—what is the point, really? Why should we care about anything?
The best answer today has been the best answer for millennia: find something more important than you are, and devote your life to it, protecting it, improving it, making it work, celebrating it. But doesn’t this usually require joining forces with others, finding a supporting organization with a clear vision? Yes, it
does, and for centuries the premier options have been religions, made all the more irresistible by one of the great master strokes of advertising: you can’t be good without God. There may well have been a time when this was practically true, when the only feasible path to a life of importance (and we all want our lives to be important) was to be a member in good standing of one church or another, one temple or another. Step One in the project of having a meaningful life was to be God-fearing. Those who weren’t God-fearing were seen as disreputable, untrustworthy, sinful, defective, empty."

- Dan Baker

"The term “God-fearing” is a fascinating fossil trace of ear lier times, when the standard or default conception of God was as an anthropomorphic Protector of Us (but not Them), Merciful Judge, Witness to our sins, Appreciator of our praise and our incessant declarations of undying loyalty. And that largely obsolete conception of God was itself a direct descendant of earlier conceptions of gods that were genuinely frightening, because they had to be appeased, and were far from loving or just or even good. How strange that the term should survive today with so little recognition of not only its obsolescence but its embarrassing history of oppression!
Wake up, folks! Listen to what your holy texts actually say! Among the delights of Dan Barker’s book are the succession of startling juxtapositions, looking at our religious practices through the eyes of a quizzical Martian. Did you realize that all Christian ministers are essentially slave traders, prized for their ability to soothe and cajole their flock of slaves into ever more submissive obedience, and even getting them to pay their keepers."

- Dan Baker

"Asking, “If there is no God, what is the purpose of life?” is like asking, “If there is no Master, whose slave will I be?” If the purpose of life is to become a submissive slave, then your meaning comes from flattering the ego of a person whom you should despise."

- Dan Baker

I don't want to fuck around with ugly truth… but the truth is that bible is teaching how to obey without asking and becoming slave!

"The historical Jesus is nicely compared to the historical Paul Bunyan. (Was there a huge lumberjack in the North Woods who inspired the tales? Maybe. Does it matter?) Then there is Barker’s darker demonstration of how religion compromises our moral judgment, by telling a story of utter depravity and eliciting a judgment from an audience that this was the deed of a moral monster, and then changing the names and circumstances oh so slightly and turning it into the horrific tale in the book of Job. As Richard Dawkins has so vividly and memorably put it, in The God Delusion."

- Dan Baker

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
Some people have found this assertion unforgivably rude, but if they pause to reflect on what the tales from the Old Testament, read literally, actually tell us, how can they not acknowledge that it is a fair assessment? Barker’s ingenious exercises of imagination draw the point to our attention in a…"

- Dan Baker

"But then he shows how surprisingly easy it is to be a good person! Yes, you can learn to ride a bike, and yes, you can become a good and meaningful person without bothering yourself with all the dark confusions and contradictions imposed on you by your heritage of irrationality and obfuscation.
We don’t need religion to be good. Religion actually gets in the way. Getting rid of purely religious mandates makes life simpler and safer. Rejecting religion filters out the noise to bring a clarity of judgment, making it easier to be a good atheist than a good Christian…"

- Dan Baker

Comedy: Bible (5)

By DeYtH Banger

"“Life is meaningless without God!”
How many times have I heard that? I have participated in more than a hundred public debates and have listened to many arguments for the existence of God, and often my opponents will throw in this nonargument during closing statements. “You may not be convinced by the evidence and arguments,” they admit, “but you should believe anyway because otherwise your life is empty and worthless.”
That rhetoric may work for some, but not for me. Tens of millions of people in the United States, and hundreds of millions around the world, lead happy, loving, productive, moral, and meaningful lives without believing in a god. We atheists have immense purpose—life-driven purpose—thank you, and are not starving for anything more."

- Dan Baker

"Chapter 4, “Much Ado About,” is my attempt to answer the question, “Can something come from nothing?” or “Why is there something rather than nothing?” These are not arguments for the existence of a god—they are just questions—but they are interesting and relevant, and many believers imagine they prove something. I make what I think is a strong case that those distracting questions are fruitless. I intend for this chapter to remove a prop from the claim that we were created by a superior intelligence to serve his aims rather than our own. It is not directly related to purpose and meaning, except for the fact that if there weren’t something rather than nothing, there could be no meaning or purpose at all!
It is true that “atheism” is a negative word, but so is “nonfiction.” They are double negatives. Both words tell you that what you are getting is real, not pretend. Those of us who do not believe in a god have nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to fear, and nothing to regret over our lack of faith. On the contrary, we nonbelievers have something valuable to offer the world, underscoring the fact."

- Dan Baker

"...that life is valuable for its own sake alone. Unlike many believers, we atheists are not smug, divisive, or exclusive about our views: we welcome all people into the natural human family. A supernatural additive pollutes what is pure and precious in our species. We atheists simply refuse to be cheated of the good life It is about you.
Forget what pastor Rick Warren says. When it comes to purpose, it is about you and no one else.
This doesn’t mean everything is about you. Morality is how you treat your neighbor and truth is how well your statements match reality. Behavior and opinions can actually be objectively right or wrong, independent of your thoughts."

- Dan Baker

Comedy: Bible (6)

By DeYtH Banger

Fourscore?… What the hell… who the hell tells which team gets score?
.. 6 years Abraham..
How about go grab a large cup of … sip of object.

"I am almighty God"

- Yeah you… you selfish… disgusting prick!

"Be thou perfect"

- What type insecure asshole are you?
Betwext… what the hell… foreskin… sacrafice… what type disgusting God are you?
How about stop setting stakes and rules… okay… I already hate you… I don't need mistakes… to double my hate.
"Thee" - What the fuck?

Really… concept of money… what the hell… this modern type of bullshit in the early ages of the world we were giving chicken for bread… eggs for milk… that was basically economy and definetly bible needs update of God… giant lizards… really?

This is your argument for dinosaurs!?
Rest your soul… wash your feet … what type of modern bullshit is this?

"And make cakes upon the heart"… - This shit does not make sense.. you fucking disgusting flesh eating bacteria… go stop alcohol… it's definetly here… high levels of alcohol.
"They stood… they did eat"… How about go ambolish this bitch! I hate moms… what more nasty and disgusting creature than a mom… in the holy grail and spirit… wise people have excuses to do terrible stuff.
I don't know… I don't say I know and I am not as ignorant as theists… but those tents and tent doors are like going on the road of wrong facts…

"Waxed old… should I have pleasure that my lord being is old…"

How about go on the road fuck you…and what type of pervert is to let humans to be with certain set of fantasies and in the same tine pervert out… above is watching… what's wrong with this dude… that dude… definetly needs a sentences… to pervert to be taken seriously… and people to respect him. Sorry, but child molestors… don't respect!

"Shall I have son"

What the hell… permission about multiplying... wasn't saod in the begining be fruitful and multiply… why now ask for permission… the world in that BC is too much… to much people are alive?

What happen with the other characters?
Oh yes… I know the answer… God ognorant and so far he has forgotten!

"I laughed not".… - This shit is contradicting… also learn grammar you disgusting pervert… that's my vision… old fat bearded…fuck… who is jobless.

"Lord… may… and lord say"

- Definetly… in all languages or whatever you look it like… looks like god is trying self-depication. You either may or say… you can't go with finishing sentence… probably the host with the vision … is some kinda bad…grammar student witha horrible grammar + probably blind and not ready for proper logical argument… religion is based on faith.. science on arguments… on logic.

"Abraham Stood… before God"

- This shit is crazy… you can't stay before a higher supreme being.

Righteous… means good people so far from what I read and understand there is destroy good people.
Why God wants 50… what's with the fetish wotj big numbers….

50… 45 .. 30… is that some kinda sell… God isn't as wise as we think he is!

Comedy: Bible (7)

By DeYtH Banger

Destroy because waxen great… fuck that!
We all are relatives and cousins and we all sisters and brothers… if that thy truth… you are right now doing the biggest sin… fucking somebody who is a family member?

I and him… and them.. and you… what's wrong with that story every page… paragraph… sentence… changes narrator… this is strong level of moral bullshit.
Please explain how thy fear a character for whom we don't anything as for what type of character he is.
Ammon… sorry but such family figure in my family tree does not exist… so fuck that weird wacko names… Moab… Abah… how about holy grail of fuck you? When we hear age we get idea tge older you get the wiser you get… but 100 years old and having 8 days old baybe?… It's not a son… but a baybe… first… secondly he is not wiser… he is dumb.
I got the whole thing wrong?
No… you have the wrong idealistic conclusions!
Oh god… this goes so fucking wrong… it's such a horrible story… plot… fuck it.

As most atheists go bible is piece of crap, fairytail… a book with collection of stories… written by many people.

"Offer him… to burnt"

- This shit is sick

"She said.. he said… himself"… what type of bullshit story is that and everything happening jn few days what haplen with magnificent God… Jusus the magician… I am still curious… how religious people hold position… HOW THE HELL!?

"Jehovah-jireh"- Is the name of the mountain, first thy not kill… and now it comes to sacrafice… did the fucking writter or the team of writers… read what is written?
It goes the story like Greek methology… then we go with contradiction God.

SO FAR AS SETH ANDREWS PUTS IT
RELIGIOUS PEOPLE TALK LIKE IDIOTS

"Sarah was hundread and seven and twenty years old." - This shit needs to go in the hole garbage… it's not possible.

Then "he spake to the audience" - What type of shitty word is that… it's not speak… but spake… what the hell is that?

WHAT MAKES ME MAD IS WHY GOD IS ALWAYS WITTY… WHO THE HELL HAS WRITTEN HIS FUCKING SCREENPLAY?

"I will burry my dead there."

- Wacko and sick shit.

"In all borders… round about."

- What is that?

First position the story goes with two much repeation… from that profile we can say that the creator of the bible is a youth guy… mainly because less experience makes writting horrible.
Second, what's that "borders round about"… what the hell is that?
Is it something to believe or it's one of those shitty stories about sci-fi… fictional characters?

"Preadventure… the woman willingly will follow tge land."

- If it's written… down definetly it's not free choice and also… I CAN'T THOSE GUIDES ABOUT HOW TO LIVE A LIFE… WHAT TO DO AND WHAT NOT TO DO… WHERE THE FUCK IS IT ALL THIS SHIT…

"Send me good speed"
"He said let me"

- Is it some kinda game this with bible… if you believe… no matter how… you gonna get booster?
The second thing sounds like out of poltergeist movie.

"Sarah my master wife."

- The way we introduce characters here is with mid section drama and also deffinetly gossip.

"Send me away upto my master."

- This is here is basical slavery!

"Gave up the ghost and died."

Ghost do no… die… and bitch Esau… came and… this guy… already is like main character… HOW ABOUT FUCK THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE LONGER THAN OTHERS!

He made them to eat… to feast… then he sended them away… they departed. That's how human trafficking sounds like….!

Comedy: Bible (8)

By DeYtH Banger

"I am Esau.. first born"
- I am DeYtH and you are definetly brainwashed!

Then he came… then he shalt… then he said… this shit is boring… what type of shitty fucker is God… comming and going…

GOD DOES NOT FIX MODERN LIFE PROBLEMS!

I should be a shame… for what for being obnoxious… for not taking life seriously?…. For what tell me… that I am little fucked up?

I am ashame of my mom being and treating me as an whiny ugly bitch… so you want comeback… total punchline… God does not exist… nor bible can proof
… bible is not real evidence… my father being little more violent and agressive… for what?

Here is the truth… you can go start conning others by doing magic and taking all their money or read this and masturbate, to be honest… I don't care… I FUCKING DON'T CARE…

I AM GOING TO BE FPR A WHILE AROUND THE BIBLE… PROBABLY I AM GOING TO FINISH THIS CRAPPY ARGUNENT OR PROBABLY GO SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HOLY BOOK
AND SAY

FUCK YOU
AND MOVE ON SOMETHING MORE REAL AND LESS FAIRY

IF FEW THINGS ARE TRUTH IT IS

1) Bible is not adaptable for modern times
2) Bible knowledge is not applicable
3) Bible can't be taken in any other form…

We need critical thinking… rape and killing we see as bad nor good so does bible follow the same knowledge.

Technology or in other words… the things which make us static are the things which create deeper inner in ourself problems… I am not saying … I don't want to be… a programist… it's fun… it's cool… it's great… but this shit creates… inner problems… depression… stress… paranoia… DO I WANT THAT?

Disease expert or micro-biologist, it has a great name and it's great thing… but the life style … of most those fuckers… is horrible… so I AM NOT GOING TO GO FOR THAT SHIT.

Psychologist, it's fun… it's cool… but I am not planning it as a job… probably as for now it's left of as a hobby. Most of you have hobbies.. of getting your genes in your hands… dose up so much that you are going to die… but as for me… my hobbies are not life threatening… After while.. more ignorant position than to read the bible abd nothing more and go into the beast mouth.

Here is something to hold in mind rude people they don't fuck around… nice guy do… you never know when in your reality nice guy comes, what is his fucking agenda?

Is here to fuck you over?
Take you over?
To con you?
To manipulate you?

DEFINETLY STOP THOSE RELIGIOUS BULLSHIT!

I started reading bible, I got a whole lot of opinion you can take it and steak it right in your ass, ferl free… feel freedom in life… go for it… go still fucking dildo in your ass. I hate holidays… why?
What more wirse thing that rediscovering you whole all problems over again with double knock-out?
So the Bible goes as far as I started reading it… and I am not applying… modern … ir analyzing… but the whole story is silly. It's time to drop off… from the train with those shitty wagons… Bible is as near as going around stories Games of Thrones… Lord of Rings… but at least one thing is good in those shows they got evidence… AS FOR THE DEAR FUCKING BIBLE THE WHOLE HOLY STORY IS FUCKING MADE UP!

Comedy: Bible (9)

By DeYtH Banger

What more easy escape way… for wise ass guy to commit something imoral and have fucking damn good excuse in the pocket?
Since the whole tine he was throwing hatred… fucking hatred… I AM TELLING YOU… HE WAS DOING HATRED… HE HATES ME.. HE HATES THEM
... HE HATES ALL… SOMETINES ANGER IS NERV WRECKING SHIT.

I feel bad when I see religious person he is as authentic as my mom sucks my dad dick… IT JUST NEVER HAPPENS!
BUT STILL WITHIN ME I HAVE VERY STRANGE DESIRES!

To be good and to have moral we don't need bible… bible is teaching about sacrafice and feeling more guilty. If you are in to depress mode most times in your life… that last thing you want to read is about hell and getting the whole premium full package of "Fear Of Hell"…then going over shit which says that you are guilty as a verdict. So fuck the big judge (aka… God).

KILL YOUR SON
KILL YOUR SON
KILL YOUR DAUGHTER
KILL YOUR DAUGHTER

Go do it… If you gonna believe in God you definetly need to believe and into this nasty shit. To be honest… I am not planning of becoming holy person… okay… I am going to make certain decisions… certain choices… but this doesn't make me… believer okay… leave a beard… also and DEFINETLY WHAT SENDS ME CHILLS AND WORRIES IS THAT OUT THERE… UP IN THE SKY… THERE IS A GUY WHO WATCHES PEOPLE (NOT SANTA… BUT SAME BULLSHIT HERE… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT GOD)… 24/7… Who knows which couple is having sex… now…
.. and even for first time… people who masturbate now… and for first time and the twist comes over here when the porn category with genres and section ends not here butbaround 50 year lld having sex with younger female. The question where is God?

WHAT THE HELL IS THIS FUCKING PERVERT DOING OUT THERE?
SHAKING BALLS?
PLAYING WITH PIPES?
WHY IN FUCKING HELL WE NEED SUCH TYPE OF VOYOUARISTIC BITCH!

I am planning to leave the beard on my face mainly because, I am planning to compensate... if I get one those God bio premium packages of tumor and cancer… and become bold… to have something…

Tumor… Cancer, one thing is sure… Nature likes to put accessories… around the stuff which are debt with the grandmaster of Life. But let's think about it the big cake of attraction is full of creeps and one of them is the akward asshole with first name God.

I definetly gonna get something woth fucking around woth topic… but whatever… Most people say Jesus.. like it's some kinda masturbation manifesto, God… who the hell is God?… No first name… no second name… or last… JUST GOD

Some people say God and Jesus are one… yup… those the same naked… nude perverts which we have made up for self-amusement and show off. God and Jesus with 100% see here difficulty in parenting… + full on levels of alcohol… drugs and mainly distant psycholigical disorders. As for the mom the story which I have is total drop off it goes with she was prostitute and little far fact she was fucked by Jesus. We are talking about whole new definition of being pervert.

Let me explain you the bible with little more easy terminology.. the old testament is all about God as A Badboy… well mfe story… with selfish fucker lurking around… I am going to skip the part of perverted fantasies.
New Testament... it's bright as a whole new day.. That over there is a Nice guy and that's how much we hate those fuckers…

Nice…
Stalking
Obsessive
Jealous
Angry
Rage
Mad
Crazy

Those are the words..

BUT THIS DOESN'T MEAN I AM NOT GOING TO SEARCH A WAY TO APPLY FOR THE JOB OF JURY
IF THERE US COURT OUT IN THE SKY… WITH A JUDGE… I AM FIGHTING FOR TO BECOME A JURY AND SUICIDE IS AS SCARY PROCESS AS FUCKING AROUND WITH MUSCLE GUYS!

The true… the thy true sinners are tge machos in the fitness… I HATE THOSE VALIDITY FUCKERS…

Comedy: Bible (10)

By DeYtH Banger

What type of fucked up God, do we have… Created humans out of… technology has God used to create adam from dust?
Okay… fuck faith!
Definetly fuck religion!
Eve was created from Adam Ribs… we are talking about canabalistic scenario, mainly because old times if we had certain bio technology we won't be left so much behind.
Also humans are created with inner "ego"… Everyday it needs to be fed with evidence to back it up. This is total bullshit level!

"Jacob lived one month with him."

- Wow… what the fuck he lived one month with him?
Really?… WHO CARES?
BIG MOBBY DICK
BIG WHALE

Lavana started gossping… how about go fuck all that drama and soap opera bullshit.
What the hell bible talks about selling … and marketing products… really?
The new testament is against it and we are talking about salary… and free working… That's definetly bullshit… old testament is all about slavery.
Jacob abd Rahail… really… we can spot 100% homosexuality im this shitty verse… what type of vigiliant God is this?
This total slave selling… but free… or is it?
1,2,3,4,5… 15,16,17,18,19…. 27,28… is this some kinda total bullshit?
How people even believe in this shit… it's like day to day… what happens… no any type of miracles and miracles are as real as vaginal stab… but still facts talk more than faith… vaginal stab is plausibility and miracles are sone kinda mystical bullshit verse.

OH YOU FUCKING JEALOUS SON OF A BITCH GO GRAB CUP OF DICKS… SHITTY FUCKER!

People talk about genius shit about bible and miracles and holy grail shit… what I can spot is total outcome…

OF FUCK OFF!

Before God… then lord… now Jacob… HOW ABOUT GO FUCK YOURSELF… MAIN PROBLEM STOP WITH THIS REPEATING SHIT!

When I talk about.. Gid see higher possible shit yo do… not little miracles and stop with so much searching patterns… those patterns as bullshit as far as your friend fucking your mom.

This plot shit is total shitty… same characters… nothing interesting… the biggest miracle so far is making thy father suffer… and helping somebody to get better salary. Sounds like devil himself and also since when sons and daughters… wishes come true?

Wasn't it suppossed the one of the commandments… listen to thy parents.

I can't take a one friend out… let's the group level shit and some kinda old fucker from the old testament Isab… went out with 400 men…

This whinny fucker us fucking damn social manipulative fucker!

Comedy: Bible (11)

By DeYtH Banger

The deeper you go the deeper bullshit you need to hang out with. The bible is like 1218… probably in the new future we are suppossed to get few new modern bullshit updates. Playing with my dick and valls I am going to learn something more valuable…than going around with Bible…

LET ALONE NOT BE ON THIS TOPIC!

"I have read the Bible at least three times, front to back, not skipping anything. My biggest takeaway is that it is a useless and boring fairytale that doesn’t have any relevance in modern life."

"Seeing as how the bible is nothing more than a conglomeration of stories made up by various random uneducated people, some clearly schizophrenic or delusional, and the rest liars, I actually don't give a f#$# about what the bible says or what was cherry picked or not or figurative or metaphorical - it's all meaningless crap to me. But some atheists do successfully use the bible to counter theists. So if that interests you, by all means go for it. If you haven't already watched the Atheist Experience on YT, you might want to do that. The hosts on there regularly bash theists over the head with their own bible and trash all the stupidity in the bible. It's like a never ending source of stupidity and incompetence."

"How does religion appeal to so many people through the ages? Because they are satisfyed with the information given to them. Although it doesn't make sense, they believe it because they're afraid to believe in nothing. It's more satisfying to believe in something instead of nothing according to them. That's why when they face logical arguements, they still choose to believe in god even though it doesn't make sense."

"As a former Jehova's witness: When people are in a bad place and suddenly arrive in a seemingly loving group that seemingly is happy and joyous because of their beliefs you will start believing those beliefs because the people are showing you those beliefs are true.

It's all brainwashing really. Finding a person that's down, cheer them up, brainwash them, isolating them, brainwash them more, give them a feeling that only God and the organisation are the reason they are feeling better and... Tada! You got a believer.

That's why new recruits are mostly made where people are feeling down. Minorities, poor people, prisons, hospitals, after loved ones died etc etc."

"You are absolutely right, it's all manipulation and taking advantage of people who are already in a bad place. Never ever will you find a happy atheist who's got everything going well in life suddenly turn theist. It just doesn't happen.

Also teens are still developing their critical thinking skills, and usually they feel overwhelmed and misunderstood, so they can be a easy target."

"I realized that the rational arguments for the existence of God actually work. To put it most plainly “what caused God? is a bad objection because it treats God as just another finite cause.

But in that case, we’re still facing either an infinite regress of finite causes, or finite causes from non-causality. That’s what you get if all causes are finite. Both options are irrational, so logically at least one non-finite (infinite ) cause exists.

Often people respond “why can’t the universe be the infinite cause?” When I speak of the universe, I’m speaking of a collection of finite, space-time causes. If that’s infinite, we’re in the infinite regress again. If you shape the definition of universe differently, to fit into God’s place in the argument, all that’s really happened is a swap of labels.

At which point, some might say, “it’s not really a swap, because the universe is not a personal agent, as God is.” But there being no superior force to compel the universe to create, there’s no difference between a sterile universe that just sits there forever, vast and empty, and absolute nothingness in terms of explanatory value. Mere existence is not sufficient, no external motivation exists, so internal motivation is a necessary condition. Moreover, it has to be inherent internal motivation, not a program implemented from some other source, because again, no other source. This means personal agency, not robot or superior impersonal law.

Also, we are personal agents. If the universe does not have personal agency inherently, and caused us, that would mean that lesser levels of existence can directly cause greater levels of existence. Matter directly causes life, life directly causes consciousness, consciousness directly causes rationality. But we know there can be matter without life, life without consciousness, consciousness without rationality. This kind of reductionism also terminates in the proposition that causality itself can come from non-causality, which is absurd.

For these reasons, an infinite, personal agent as the most basic level of reality is logically entailed in the existence of finite causes, especially finite personal agents like us."

- As the last argument… it sends chills up to my spine!

"Let's go… Isab… I am going to be in front of you…"

What's that?
What type verse is that?
I don't care who with who is walking… I am waiting for hardcore evidence… as legit as milf and gilf porn videos on the internet.
"How much you want we are going to give you…"

1) Greedy motherfucker
2) I hate those type of short stories with many introduced characters… with many plot holes… and so much… more… but ti be honest it still nowhere to go…

HERE IS A STRONG ARGUMENT
FUCK OFF GOD…

Comedy: Bible (12)

By DeYtH Banger

He wants a daughter and he gets what he wants… HOW ABOUT STOP THE BULLSHIT FAIRYTAIL!
Aka Sihema

What I can spot so far is useless historical fuckers getting glory… and the masogenistic God fucker wanting people to worship him. You son of bitch… Don't think we are past bitches, we are modern fuckers… so worshiping costs time… and time… money… SO GO GET MONEY… WORSHIPPING IS NOT FREE!

Ada… name of person so far from my database it's hell!
Funerals and death goes like fucking holiday… human celebratwle or that's how I see it… free food… and with the whole folks package. When funerals come… I always make sure to get time as much as possible… I LOVE IT…

I care about the character if the person…nor the flesh… not the flesh eating bacteria… People say bible is full…of wisdom… but how about fuck off. People say bible is full of wisdom, but this is bullshit!
This is tough real bullshit!!

This fucker is as modern as a good gets down here and start wanking dick, if god is real few things are true… society is boring so does he. Is this another Greek mythology book?
With Greek Gods!

"Here are… here are… here are."

- What's with this bullshit… intro… "here.. are"… have you hear about grammar rules.

"Oh… here is… here are…"

- More of those narrow bullshit and even we can see God introducing hierarchies. .

"When I die?…"

- Okay I don't care when those characters die… they are average… they don't know how knowledge works.. how money to invest…

Vera daughter of Vertstein of new vakuver…

- How about go fuck yourself… I am not here to listen about deep bio bullshit …. WHAT THOSE CHARACTERS HAVE TO DO WITH GOD?

Oh I know… before cheating and sins… and fucking…. We need to introduce a bunch of those mindless characters. As far as my knowledge it's not sin that some fucking people killed jesus…HE KILLED HIMSELF FOR OUR SINS… FUTURE AND PAST

I fucked those bitch because of future outcomes….as for past… FUCK THOSE TENSION BITCH SLENDER TIMES!

Oh this god… fucking shit of introducing unknow characters from nowhere… I am reading the book and from 0 up 100000 people average people…
Oh GOD DO YOU HAVE A HUMAN FACTORY?

Gladiators… ranks…?

WOW WHAT THE HELL!
What the hell are you doing creating… gettibg …. Dropping characters… there is no mystery and no tension… BECAUSE I WHILE I READ THIS BIBLE BULLSHIT BOOK
I DON'T KNOW FOR WHO TO CARE!
Again repeation.. people say in the bible there is wisdom… here is one… I spot bother jealousy… shit!

The whole town of God sucks… it's boring and it's fucking full of Selling products… marketing…. And all type of bullshit…

IF I WAS GOD… I WOULD RATHER THINK ABOUT ROPE AROUND MY NECK!

Egypt and christian… GODS?

Egyptian people have other type of Gods… who are mummified…. As for christianity put it deep as fucking your asshole.

"Here are some great… beautiful fat cows.."

And this should make me feel great… about go to science?
How about, go fuck yourself?

Cows eating cows… this shit is fucking fake!

18..19…20 verse… chapter 4…

HOW MUCH FUCKING COWS… EATEN… ALIVE… DEAD… MORE… STOP WITH THE BULLSHIT…

IT'S LIKE "LET'S ADD MORE?"

How about as for me… to care… less…!?

Comedy: Bible (13)

By DeYtH Banger

Is this some kinda narrow minded, bullshit cycle? Popes… bearded fucks… I hope they get raped… a bunch of 'em… the story plot is all about molesting… fat bearded fucks… which are in the middle of creating food crisis… with their fucked up eating habbits…. I hope christian centers get banned economically nothing good is comming out of there… retarted folks… believing in God and other fairy tales.

GROW UP YOU MOLESTED TAILED FUCKS!

Bible says that people who masturbate… go to helll…
He is fucking wrong… I go as far as to the bathroom. Jesus - God is like the bouncer of two clubs… proud bouncer… Holy bouncer of Hell and Heaven. JUST FUCKING TELL ME… WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER JERK OFF SEASON… OR MASTURBATION… ON SEASON… WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HATE CHARACTERS… LIKE CHARACTERS… WHEN I WATCH A MOVIE… I HAVE CHARACTERS WHICH I PERSONALLY HATE… LOVE AND FINE WITH THEM?

WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
SO MUCH CHARACTERS… SO MUCH BUILD UP… SHIT… INTROVERT SHIT… NAMES MAINLY GREEK AND ARABIC AND MUSLIM… WHAT THE HELL MUSLIMITY HAS TO DO WITH CHRISTIANITY?

So characters live like 800… 900… yeras in the bible and their personal stories are short as fuck… characters which in all cases are Mr. Nobody… die new characters get introduced … one after another and we are here scripting out that there is personal wisdom. Bible is bullshit, no wisdom deep in here!

How a character… we never have known has died?
This shit is some type of kingsmen bullshit…
This here… holy bullshit… dreams of vanga…

I don't care about brothers and dreams… it has nothing in all points to do with god… what it has… hatred… jealousy… enemies this is pure malignant shit…

19 verse
- The dream reader… visioner is comming!
HOLY FUCKING CHRIST
HOLY JESUS

We are selling people…

"Jacob was sold in Egypt…"

- I am spotting slavery… the near thing about slavery is black people… probably the guy is black.

The way the visioner… the viewer… inteprates… the dreamer reader goes… it sounds like Vanga Bullshit.

Chapter 39

Verse 10

- Is this some other bullshit story… "he didn't wanted to sleep with her… he didn't wanted to be with her"…- Oh okay… and who cares for other people… when main priority is God and we just have went into deep shitty hole.

Jew rape… another sin…

DID YOU SAW THAT?
HAVE YOU EVER READ THAT?

The bible talks about God… then random characters… now Egypt?

And Egyptian… Pharaoh… WHICH IS NEXT LOCATION?
COME AND RAPE ME?
GO AND CATCH ME?

Comedy: Bible (14)

By DeYtH Banger

God is bullshit, each religion has different requirments and different stuff got in this holtly fucking book. Some people say “Alah Akbar”, which means “God Is Great” and such words said sonewhere puts you on jail and also starvation… homeless people… let’s talk about this?

STOP THE CRAP SHIT
OF THEY HAVE CHOOSEN THAT PATH

ALSO WE HAVE NO RECORDS OF GOD AND WE DON’T NEED GOD TO BE MORAL
WE CAN BE MORAL AND WITHOUT GOD

Why you don’t believe?
In Flying unicorns… Santa Claus… Boggie man and in the same you believe in a beast fabble about the creature God?

The religious nuts are bullshitters and definetly the bet is to go with a beard… until I finish thid nible non-sense. What I need is not another delusional religious nut, but normal… fully developed fully capable thinking creature… What bible can expose is that it’s all against women +… every type of desire is sinful. We can see some acts of human sins into animals… but when they do it.. sonehow God ignorant…

HOW THE HELL HAPPENS THAT?

FUCK ALL RELIGIOUS RETARDED FOLKS AKA FUCKERS!

“And Jacob when he wanted to cry he cried in his room.”

“Then he washed his face and said: Bring Bread”

- First of all… all those here verses have nothing to do with God and still are you so weak minded that you don’t even question the bible… how intepretate the bible… the worst ever book read with the most horrific plot.

“Bring Bread”

- What type of oneliner is this… it’s more likely a tag…

Egypt hate jews and this can be spotted in the bible… the beginning…

ISN’T GOD ALL ABOUT
LOVE
COMPASSION
AND SHOT LIKE THAT?

WHY JESUS AND GOD IS ONE
I GET IT… IT’S BECAUSE IT’S ONE OF THEIR NERV WRECKING MOMENTS

AND DEFINETLY… I WANT TO SAY JOKES!

And what’s day and night it’s so… small day… we start getting the idea and the fucker throws

“In the morning the mankind… humans…”

- This here is the worst kinda of punchline, horrible from all angles.

Those here edgy fuckers are talking about boses when we can see only one boss!

This God is bullshitter and full of shit… full premium package of excuses and lies.

Comedy: Bible (15)

By DeYtH Banger

I am reading the bible and trying to understand how made up guy… can be our friend?

What I can do with him?
Soul sex?

I mean after all he knows everything about us… what we do, talk… think… sounds like Santa Claus but more pervert version which goes like from 3- up to 5 days a year… 24/7. Such guy has stalker issues with main problems being selfish and also got stare syndrome below his belt. I have read the bible COME ON… DON’T BULLSHIT ME
GOD IS NOT PLOT EXPERT
WRITER EXPERT
A GUY WITH ANY SKILLS
I READ LIKE 60 PAGES OUT OF THE BIBLE … WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT GUY WHO HAS WRITTEN THIS IS A HORRIBLE WRITER

THE BOOK IS NOT SLIGHTLESS UPDATED

AND BIBLE GOT IT… ALL?
WHAT IS IT?
BULLSHIT TELL… #1

BULLSHIT
PRAYERS FO NOT GIVE ME MONEY
WORK
AND THOSE SPIRITUAL AND INCARNATION SHOT IS WOOOOOOO WOOOO NONSENSE

IT’S FREE THE BIBLE BECAUSE OS BULLSHOT TAIL WOTH NO ANY USEFUL THINGS

Bible wants it we to intepretate it… in symbolic way?
WHY?
BECAUSE IT’S FAKE THAT’S MY OPINION ON YOUR FUCKING IMAGINARY FANTASY GOD

If there was a higher energy… lord… God or whatever you call on thus planet we won’t have so much sinners… and don’t throw me this is the devil bullshit.

So I get offended from people who feel offended and people who have not taken the argument and saying I am agnostic… what’s agnostic… about God?

He doesn’t exist, do your fucking homework… you aick bag of shit not after… not tommorow… but now go do it… this is what you need “now” sense… “now moment”.

I met an orthodox guy and he told me… “I can tell you what’s wrong with all other religions… muslims… buddha..”

But still “You can’t point me one bad thing about Juesus…” This resistant fuck was very sure that I can’t do that he said even that he has studied religion… which means he has cherry pick the shit + come on… bible does not create peace. It creates chaos… if we got terror… abd war it’s mainly because of religion.

Different religions say different shit about sinners and how to deal with them.

JESUS DID FEW THINGS WRONG
HE NEVER BEND OVER AND SUCK MY DICK
HE IS A FRAUD AND A LIAR
MIRACLES?
GO SUCK MY DICK AND USE YOUR TONGUE TO CLEAN MY ASS

Awful upbringing… childhood… hortible father figure. With this beard more likely an economical manipulation and influence. When we were cavemen..
We didn’t had religion… and life was great now with this religion… it’s like massive sexual mania.
Why this higher shit will give a fuck about you?
Why in first place it does that only when life is great… if you are poor and going into the trash you are left out. I just hate the noises of sleeping people it’s like SATAN IS COMMING!

Jesus is a miracle guy with snap of finger few whores should will be commin… which means he got a desire… he wants shit… come on his a flesh… meat… animal… he has sexual drive. The first problem with him is problematic libido that’s why they hide it… just like us we all hide our issues a d problems… we mask them… some people neglect them… others put make up on. The second one if he can do miracles why in first place he is not at least few times fucking… IT’S NOT SIN YOU FUCK… IT’S AN EVOLUTIONARY THING

Which makes the case open!

Comedy: Bible (16)

By DeYtH Banger

Oh we got human factory, cherry pick upers… and how far are we gettin?
Authenticity?
God is not authentic mainly because he is the more shitties superhero we have ever seen.

“Two years hunger”

- Death… death… you can’t survive and scientifical standpoint you can’t fuck without energy… fucking needs energy… food gives yiu energy. Also if tw years of hunger have happen… we are talking about chaos about death… about plenny of death bodies… THIS AUTHOR GOING LITTLE TWO FAR
WISDOM?

GO FUCK YOUR MOM
IT’S CALLED MILF

“I am send from God”

- Let’s put this guy back from mentality ill hospital… we got an illness… PRETTY DELUSIONAL!

Lord is like Big Boss… IF I STARTED FOLLOWING THIS BOOK… I AM TALKING ABOUT MASSIVE AMOUTH BECOMMING AN IDIOT… + LEFTING OUT SOCIETY… REALISM

5 years of hunger… 6 years… CAN YOU COUNT… ?

365 DAYS EACH YEAR… SO LONG PERIOD STATISTICALLY WE TALKING ABPUT AWFUL GOD + PLENY … FUCKING PLENY OF DEATH BODIES

It’s sounds like fast liner… fast liner of fairytales.

“Here I am”

- Fuck you!

I am now reading shit like “Uda” the lion…sounds like the poetry or whatever is with expaining the main characters + adding up details… is… IT SOUNDS LIKE A HORRIBLE SHAKESPEAREN SHIT

WE TALKING ABOUT HOLY MANIPULATOR
LET JESUS FUCK YOU
THIS FILTHY FUCK

Title applying of not being sure… what’s now next…

The talk sounds like talking with my granddad which mean the usefulness dies while you move on being useless… STILL EX-PEOPLE I HATE EM!

Egypt… egyptian fetish… I KNOW THAT IS PERFECT LOCATION… BUT FUCK YOU… AIN’T PLANNING TO DIEING IN THE SUN

“Coffins… three months hiding a baybe…”

We are talking about serious mental issues… those mother fuckers need hospitality. Hospitalization!

What type of fetish is making second characters make them main?

Before “Lord”…“God” now idualising “Egyptians”?

Really?

“He killed the egypt”

- Wow what?

James Patterson is here the fucking narrator?

What type of suprise is that?

Eatmyass.com?
Or fuckmeasfaraspossible.bg

“Bring Him To Eat Bread”

- I am not religious… Because there is limuts in food in islam you can’t eat pigs in christianity those folks are with limitted thunder bender menu… Bread? Fish?
Blood?
Wine?

Sounds like an members out of the alcoholic family + on the other side the menu is fucking limited… I don’t eat bread only… okay?

FOLKS?

If you don’t want me to fuck around… just don’t give me the fucking bible… OKAY… AIN’T PLAYING YOUR PERVERTED GAME!

“Groan from slavery.”
“Shouting go to God”
“Aliens”

What the hell is that?
Go get bucket of evidence and put it right in your fucking ass … Groan?
What’s that? Sexual fantasy?
Slavery and sexuality… OH OKAY I GOT IT BDSM

OH YOU SHITTY FUCJER IS NOT GROANING WHIKE BEING SLAVERY… DON’T RUIN THE WHOLE PIRN SECTION… PPEASE… UGH FUCKING PLEASE IT’S CALL BONDAGE FOR GOD SAKE YOU MORON YOU FUCKING PSYCHO

+ OTHER SIDE I SPOTTED HUGE AMOUTH OF CHILD CURIOSITY… OF WHAT I AM DOING… I AM MAKING SHIT UP?
LIKE YOU ALL OTHERS FOOLS 24/7

God once and for all got a message oh this goddam fucking fuck… once… at least fucking once to be less selfish and more selfless. Aliens… we got sci-fi?

“Remeber the tastement with Jacob, Avram and Isac?”

What’s that?
I get it God says that… we need to believe and trust the ehole idea… but still remembering what?
The homosexuality?
I was thinking about

Oh god I know you can get their position… I GET THIS WHOLE IDEA SUPRISE ME YOU PIECE FUCKING GARBAGE YOU PILE OF CHEAPLESS FUCKS…

“God Angel appeared”

STOP THE FUCKING DRUGS MEN… JUST STOP EM THE MOMENT YOU SEE SO MUCH SHIT THIS LEVEL OVER THE TOP USING DRUGS

Jesus or let’s say God as more clear… to be is an easy sterotype with beard… probably mid 30-40-ties…

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A HOMELESS PERSON
IT’S POSSIBLE TO BE GOD THIS IS THE BEST EXAMPLE OF INDIVIDUAL LIVING ALONE LIFE

WE NEED SEX IN BATHROOM?
WHY?
BECAUSE THAT’S THE PLACE WHERE HARD ONS MEET HOLES AND ALOBG THE WAY LOSE ALL CAPACITY OF MAKING BABIES

Comedy: Bible (Proper Arguments… Jehovah Witness) (Part 1)

by DeYtH Banger

“Better is a dish of vegetables where there is love than a fattened bull where there is hatred.”Proverbs 15:17“I, Jehovah, am your God, the One teaching you to benefit yourself, the One guiding you in the way you should walk.”Isaiah 48:17“Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need, since the Kingdom of the heavens belongs to them.”Matthew 5:3

“You must love your neighbor as yourself.”Matthew 22:39“Just as you want men to do to you, do the same way to them.”Luke 6:31“Happy are those hearing the word of God and keeping it!”Luke 11:28 “When a person has an abundance, his life does not result from the things he possesses.”Luke 12:15“So, having food and clothing, we will be content with these things.”1 Timothy 6:8“There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving.”Acts 20:35

- The bible is written by many authors… it’s not holy written from God it’s written from many people it’s mass manipulation… we got social media we got twitter the more believers manipulate. Beliving in invisible force… makes you happy… so the holy fuck… the emptiness which you feel is something which God needs place…

What a silly crazy arguments and this doesn’t stop us from moral conduct… cherry picking from the bible… this is some kinda joke?

You say that you believe then you

Cherry pick

How about

GETT ON YOUR FUCKING KNEES AND GIVE ME A BLOWJOB

AT LEAST WE ARE NOT DOING CHERRY PICKING UP HERE!

“Throw your burden on Jehovah, and he will sustain you. Never will he allow the righteous one to fall.”Psalm 55:22“The plans of the diligent surely lead to success, but all who are hasty surely head for poverty.”Proverbs 21:5“Do not be afraid, for I am with you. Do not be anxious, for I am your God. I will fortify you, yes, I will help you, I will really hold on to you with my right hand of righteousness.”Isaiah 41:10“Who of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his life span?”Matthew 6:27“So never be anxious about the next day, for the next day will have its own anxieties. Each day has enough of its own troubles.”Matthew 6:34 “Make sure of the more important things.”Philippians 1:10

“Do not be anxious over anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication along with thanksgiving, let your petitions be made known to God; and the peace of God that surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and your mental powers by means of Christ Jesus.”Philippians 4:6, 7

- I like playing in the arrogant arrow… role… to be in this downside… fucking going forward with fucking around… SO here is the thing science is science… stable foundaments… bible is unstable shit… stop talking in complex words… going around the point… over the point but never on the point… that’s the bible… I read those above arguments.

CLEARLY

VERY ADAPTABLE SHITTY FUCKER

DOING COMEDY IN OTHER LANGUAGE.. … IS HARD!?

HOW ABOUT GO DOWN AND SUCK YOUR DICK… YOU GAY FUCK

GAY FUCKS SUCK

IT’S PROPER ARGUMENT FOR TONIGHT SHOW

HUSBANDS/FATHERS

“In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself, for no man ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cherishes it … Each one of you must love his wife as he does himself.”

Ephesians 5:28, 29, 33

“Fathers, do not be irritating your children, but go on bringing them up in the discipline and admonition of Jehovah.”

Ephesians 6:4

WIVES

“The wife should have deep respect for her husband.”

Ephesians 5:33

“You wives, be in subjection to your husbands, as it is becoming in the Lord.”

Colossians 3:18

CHILDREN

“Children, be obedient to your parents in union with the Lord, for this is righteous. ‘Honor your father and your mother’ is the first command with a promise: ‘That it may go well with you and you may remain a long time on the earth.’”

Ephesians 6:1-3

“You children, be obedient to your parents in everything, for this is well-pleasing to the Lord.”

Colossians 3:20

- So what?… I need to be obedient to my parerents?
How about go fuck yourself!

More proper and exact argument and on the point I can’t give you than this one here!

Subjections?

Who tha fuck are you

kill yoursewlf

Silly fuck!

Manipulation of Jehovah… go fuck yourself!

Comedy: Bible (17)

By DeYtH Banger

Hey… hey… do not fuck around you promised me to read the bible go and read it and stop with the bravo lips gesture… fuck that.

The people who have written the bible are illiterate.

“She turned the thing in her hand into wand.”
“He put his hand in the bosom… And he putted his hand in the bosom.”

- We call this wisdom story comming out Harry Potter book…

- We talking about full on retarded… this guy has serious mental issues…

“The when he removed it from the bosom his hand was white as snow.”

- People say that all of them have been aroubd the bible… OKAY GREAT
BUT YOU ARE NOT LIKE ME… I AM A PERVERT + I AM WALKING DATA
LET’S GO BACK TO THE TOPIC

WHITE AS SNOW?
IT’S CALLED SEMEN AND MORE SCREW UP… SPERM

AS FOR THE BIBLE WISDOM IS FUCKED UP AND WASTE OF TIME… THIS GUY KNOWLEDGE HAS DRIED OUT

People say that comedians… have already done with bible… NO YOU HAVEN’T I HAVE WHOLE FUCKING NEW PACKAGE OF OPINIONS AND ARGUMENTS

The people from the bible are alcoholics… wine… OH COME ON… JESUS MAKES HEALTHY SHIT INTI UNHEALTHY… SHIT?

OH COME MIRACLE
DELUSIONER FUCK
GET SONE SENSE OF KNOWLEDGE

Jesus does miracles… one of them is sucking my dick some people want more shit not only for christianity… but and for the other religions… the self-destroying… bombing jihad… this is because of holy cows of desparation… the fat budda… fat obesity fuck… I don’t care about other arguments here is one… Jesus comes from the dead after findingbout that his childhood was child hood traumatic… dysfunctional parents…
And come on… father hard alcoholic.… deep issues and mother which was whore and let’s maje something out of this kid..

Let lies shed… and spread his holy greatness.
Spirit - How about go fuck yourself
Higher Being - Just hope and pray to whatever you want for me to not come… over and butcher you with my hard mass dick…

Theists are foolist, DO YOU KNOW WHAT IN FUCKING HELL YOU BELIEVE IN?

DO YOU PLAY THE GAME CHERRY PICKING?
OR YOU READ IT ALL…
JUST STOP AND READ IT…
SOLVATION OF PROBLEMNIS TO READ IT…

Religious people are just pretenders…
They just predent that they believe in that jimbo… jambo… bimbo… bullshit.
People who believe in Higher Power, refuse to grow up and to admit that it does not exist.

Comedy: Bible (18)

by DeYtH Banger

Truth, so what?
People go with
“God doesn’t want us to have acess to this”
When I asked…
And who created God?

I GET IT
REFUSAL OF GROWING UP
YOU START MADING UP SHIT
JUST MAKING SHIT UP

HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT TO TAKE LITERALLY AND HOW TAKE AND UNDERSTAND SOMETHING OUT OF THE BIBLE?
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHICH TO IGNORE AND WHICH NOT TO…
HOW DO YOU DECIDE TO CHERRY PICK UP SHIT?

HOW FUCKING DO YOU DO IT?
OR YOU TAKE THE WHOLE BOOK
OR NOTHING

Most of their evidence of religious people is based upon the bible. So dpes and the fucking stupid spirtuality… based upon the bases of religion…

Most evidences are represented by ignorant people, ignorance and faith is not open minded…
It has not any type of signs of open minded…

IT’S JUST A FUCKING FOOLISH DECISION…
EVIDENCE
- BIBLE
- EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE
OR
- THREATS

ARE NOT FUCKING EVIDENCE

WHAT THEY NEED TO DO
THEIST TO START THINKING AND RETHINKING WHAT THEY ARE SAYING…
BECAUSE EVIDENCE WHICH THEIR GIVING AND WHAT THEIR SAYING IS IMPOSSIBLE

Lepricorns - DO NOT EXIST
Tooth Fairies - DO NOT EXIST
Unicorns - DO NOT EXIST
Santa Claus - DO NOT EXIST
Boogey Man - DOES NOT EXIST

BUT SOMEHOW
GOD…
JESUS EXIST AND THEY ONLY CONTRIBUTE TO GOOD?
AND HUMANS ARE ALL EVIL?
WHAT TYPE OF HORSE XYZ SHIT IS THIS?

New Segment!

To VeNgeR GrEenTag

Comedy: Bible *New

By VeNgeR GrEenTag

"Pray to God"

- Fuck you you oblivious fuck.

"I found God"

- You found dick in my ass you declined, neutral fuck.

"“The characters and events depicted in the damn bible are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.”

Penn and Teller

The Bible is a collection of 66 different books, the writings of at least 40 different authors over a period of time that spanned at least 1,500 years. The Bible, however, is not a singular catalogue of these books as the sixty-six books are each respectively assigned to either the Old or New Testament. To illustrate this, the Old Testament comprises of thirty-nine of the sixty six, Genesis to Malachi; whilst the New Testament includes the balance of twenty-seven books, the Gospel of Matthew through the Book of Revelation. Now it is important for non-Jewish audiences to understand that the New Testament is not ‘new’, in the sense that it is a modernized or an updated version of the Old Testament, as an alarming..."

- C.J. Werlem

"Christopher Hitchens, author of God is Not Great, eloquently makes his punchy position on this:

“[New Testament] is a work of crude carpentry, hammered together long after its purported events and full of attempts to make things come out right."

- C.J. Werlem

"The books of the Bible were crafted together by ancient man to explain how his universe and his surroundings came to be. These were books that provided comfort to man, as he feared the dark, death in battle, the sound of thunder, or illness and disease. Within all civilizations, within all societies, the human existence has demonstrated its proclivity to create gods for when we cannot find meaning or understanding. For example, we knew the sun was good because it made our crops grow. No sun, no crops, no food. Therefore we created the Sun God. Similarly, gods for water, fertility, healing, etc..."

- C.J. Werlem

"The ancient Romans believed their existence was founded by the twins Romulus and Remes, both orphaned and raised by a wolf. The ancient Hebrews believed a sky-god placed a man named Adam, created from dust, and a woman, created by Adam’s rib, on earth to be the first family of their existence..."

- C.J. Werlem

"Bible, but this is what is known of the ‘Good Book’:

More than 35% of college attending Christians could not put the following in order: Abraham, the Old Testament prophets, the death of Christ and Pentecost.

One-third could also not identify Matthew as an apostle from a list of New Testament names.

The above findings corroborated by an editorial published in Politics Daily titled, Why a ‘Year of the Bible’ Would Horrify its Sponsors showed:

More than 50% don’t know that Genesis is the first book of the Bible.

More than 50% can’t name even one of the Gospels.

More than 60% can’t name at least 5 of the 10 commandments.

More than 20% think Moses was one of Jesus’ disciples.

More than 50% of High School seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah was a married couple..."

- C.J. Werlem

"Is it possible believers choose not to read it because Isaac Asimov’s famous quote, in regards to the Bible, is a truism?

“Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

– Isaac Asimo"

- C.J. Werlem

"If you ever get into a religious discussion with a Christian, for example, a circular rationale usually ensues, something like this: “The Bible is true because it is the word of God and I know it is the word of God because the Bible says so. And if the Bible says so, then it must be true, because I know the Bible is true because it is the word of God and God wouldn’t lie. I know that because the Bible says so.” Are you dizzy yet
At the risk of further extending the circular roundabout, the theological conundrum is that the onus is now on the believer to prove the existence of the Biblical God, because if he isn’t real then the book isn’t inspired!"

- C.J. Werlem

"Therefore, for the Bible to be truly inspired by a Heavenly creator, it would require that all the hundreds and thousands of men that took part in the copying and translating were ‘inspired’ by God. I now need to get off this merry-go-round.

But if we grant the believers their faith and be gracious enough to offer our humor, then shouldn’t we expect the Bible to be brim-filled with wisdom, wonder, enlightenment and beauty? Shouldn’t this book, co-authored by the supreme-being, the creator of all, be the most marvellous thing ever written; standing side by side with progressive scientific discovery and not starkly against it? Is this too much to ask? Because having read the Bible back to front, front to back, right to left, left to right, I think it is one of the most uninspiring books ever written. God’s greatest preaching to mankind, his creation, counts for little more than who I can and can’t shag; what I can and can’t eat; when I can and can’t work; how I should treat my slaves; under what terms I can annihilate..."

- C.J. Werlem

"Seems a little trivial, doesn’t it? Furthermore, this God has some bizarre and brutish methods for getting his point across, including forcing his prophet Ezekiel to eat nothing but bread..."

- C.J. Werlem

"meared with human shit for 430 consecutive days; vaporizing people into salt for innocuous errs; and of course, seeing to the slaughter of entire civilizations because they may happen to be in the way of an Israelite land grab.

Really? Is this his best effort? My god, I can literally walk into any Border’s bookstore blindfolded, march directly to the self-help section and find more wisdom in ‘Awaken the Giant within’ or ‘Chicken soup for the soul’ and these respective books are just full of pseudo pop-psychology at best and utter meaningless bullshit at worst"

- C.J. Werlem

"“…even if the Bible is a dead-on accurate transcription of God’s words, it’s rather shocking that God only had two books in him, the Old and the New Testament. I’ve actually written two books and I am sure God would have written more than me. Two books? That was all he had to say to us? You think he would have put at least a pamphlet in response to the Holocaust. And if not, a pamphlet, a couple of well placed fire-balls, for crying out loud. This is the Supreme Being we’re talking about, who whacks Sodom and Gomorrah and turns Lot’s wife to salt and Hitler doesn’t get so much as a twisted ankle? It seems a little suspicious to me.”

It becomes obvious, then, that the Bible is far from the writings of an omniscient, super-intellectual being, but rather the often incoherent rants of a few violent, self-serving, nomadic Middle Eastern yokels, who created these writings, with not only the intention of explaining the inexplicable but also for the moral justifications of slavery, subjugation of women and domination of neighboring societies to steal their land, rape their women and plunder their treasures.

Who better to put this all into some realm of reality than the great late comedian Mr. George Carlin?

“When it comes to bullshit, big-time, major league bullshit, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises

and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ‘til the end of time! But He loves you."

- C.J. Werlem

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God?

‘God’ and ‘evil’ in the one sentence surely challenges the public relations spin of God being a loving, just, peace-endorsing heavenly father. With ‘spoiler alert’ disclaimer up front, this examination will ultimately lead you to one of the following two conclusions, that either

God is just a creation of man’s imagination or,

God is an evil bastard.

Be assured that my caricature of the celestial cloud merchant is not just something that I have grasped on my own, as much smarter men than I contend similar. Take Richard Dawkins’, biologist and author of God Delusion, depiction of God from chapter two of his book."

- C.J. Werlam

"“The Christian God is a being of terrific character — cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust.”

Now, if your knowledge of the Bible is confined to the religious preacher sound bites, then I am sure the aforementioned quotations from Messrs. Dawkins and Jefferson come as a bit of a shock. But I dare anyone to come up with a better personality profile of the God of Abraham having read the Bible from Genesis right through to Revelations. This God created by the Hebrews is far removed from the propaganda spun by priests, pastors and popes, who use these pithy sound bites of ‘love thy neighbor’ and ‘do unto others’, or ‘turn the other cheek’ as means of packaging Christianity for sale. The Biblical reality is that this particular God will smote you for working on the wrong day; wearing the wrong clothes; sex with the wrong person; thought crimes such as wanting a new car, a new boat, or a holiday; complaining about a lack of food; complaining about the quality of the food; eating the wrong food; occupying land allotted for his ‘chosen’ people; talking back to your parents; questioning authority; looking back to see his destruction of a city; breaking the rules for owning or buying slaves; and ultimately hates you for not being an Israelite, to name but a few. He truly punctuates the air with far more reasons to hate the human condition than love it."

- C.J. Werlam

"They are able to do all of this without a sky-god to watch over them, without the benefit of a book written 4000 years ago by other chimpanzees. With this in mind, why do Christians, Muslims and Jews continue the self-loathing and self-doubting assertion that the Bible forms the framework for human morality? Laughable isn’t it? Like the chimps, we have a mutual investment and moral empathy in ensuring that perpetrators of deeds that cause harm to us are ultimately isolated from us, whether by imprisonment or ostracization. The reality-show ‘Survivor’ makes a dim-witted case in point for this dynamic. Watch any elimination episode and it is primarily those individuals that offer no altruistic value to the tribe, whether physically or politically, who are sent home for an early shower..."

- C.J. Werlam

"“A cranky old bastard”, in a heated teen-angst moment? And if we are picking and choosing the
laws worthy of following, then aren’t we playing God ourselves? Furthermore, if we accept that it is barbaric in the 21st century to sell our daughters into slavery, then it is evident that morals, like everything else in the human experience, evolve. Resulting in the conclusion that moral evolution is at the behest of man and not by God.

Further, if belief in God were inextricably tied to morality then it would be fair to assume that statistical, analytical or anecdotal data would demonstrate that societies with a higher degree of religiosity would be safer places to live, as those citizens abided by the moral code prescribed by the respective religion."

- C.J. Werlam

" Marduk’s sacred animals are horses, dogs and a dragon with a forked tongue……and when we will want to relearn that premarital sex is a sin? Or that adulteresses should be stoned to death?

“Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku Klux Klan or the Fascists?”

Bertand Russell (London, 1927"

- C.J. Werlam

"Genesis is the first book of the Bible of Judaism and Christianity, and the first of five books of the Pentateuch or Torah. It recounts Judeo-Christian beliefs regarding the world, from creation to the descent of the children of Israel into Egypt, and contains some of the best-known stories of the Old Testament, including Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah’s Ark, the Tower of Babel and the biblical Patriarchs.

For Jews the theological importance of Genesis centers on the covenants linking God to his Chosen People and the people to the Promised Land. Christianity..."

- C.J. Werlam

Comedy: Bible *New (2)

By VeNgeR GrEenTag

"The very first sentence of Genesis and therefore the Bible states:

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1 NIV

That’s it! Doesn’t tell us how he made it; what building materials were used; if any of the work was outsourced to India; or from where he sourced the materials. The Bible’s explanation of the creation of the universe is paramount to the smart-ass kid in the classroom telling you, “It just is and you wouldn’t understand it even if I told you anyway!” Imagine how confusing the creation of the universe by the Hebrew God 6,000 years ago must have been to the Sumerians as they watched on from their huts drinking beer, and using glue. Wait. What?

The next time someone says there is still a debate between our modern cosmological understanding of the universe versus the..."

- C.J. Werlam

"The remainder of the opening sentence of Genesis continues:

“Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” (Genesis 1:2 NIV)

So, the question becomes what was God doing with himself leading up to that time? Sitting idle in the formless empty darkness? How long was he sitting on his ass flicking between channels waiting for

something interesting to watch? Did he..."

- C.J. Warlem

"...this extraordinarily lengthy hiatus. Evidently, he was indeed content with floating around in the dark until, all of a sudden, he says to himself, “Fuck it, I want to create a planet, a heaven, some people and sit back and watch them destroy each other in my honor because Monday Night Football is still 6,000 years away."

- C.J. Werleman

"I find it excessively humorous that God made light out of nothing, on the second day, which means he made the heavens and the earth in the dark! Now, if creating everything we know out of nothing wasn’t a challenge enough, he did it in complete darkness. Pretty impressive, isn’t it? I can’t even write my own name in the dark, let alone create a fucking great big shark.

God Messes Up The Order

Irrefutably, the total balls up of the Genesis order of events is the smoking gun for demonstrating that God is the figure of 2000 BC man’s imagination, but in keeping"

- C.J. Werleman

"God created light and darkness on day one and the sun and the planets didn’t appear until day four, according to the scripture. So where did the light come from? No sun, no light. Oops!

On day three he creates all the earth’s vegetation, the plants and the trees, but we now know God didn’t create the sun until the following day, so how can there be plant life without photosynthesis? Oops!

Now we run into our very first contradiction, and we are only on page one of the Bible mind you, as God says that on day five he created the birds and animals from nothing more than the water from the oceans, but then in the very next chapter, as he is doing a summary of these heady seven days, it is written:

“Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the land and all the birds of the air.” (Genesis 2:19 NIV)"

- C.J. Werleman

"Moving onto the sixth day of his celestial architectural program, God decides to create a human being:

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him.” (Genesis 1:27 NIV)

Think about this for a moment: made in his own image? If we are truly made in his own image then why aren’t we invisible? But clearly I can see you and you can see me, so I think this is another fallacy straight off the bat. And if we do look like him, which of us does he most resemble? Is he Asian? Is he black?"

- C.J. Werlman

"Is he an NRA card-carrying member of the Texas branch of the Young Republicans? Or is he somewhat Tokyo metro-sexual in appearance? Does he stand naked in front of the mirror and wish he gave himself an extra inch or two, not that I do that, I’m just saying, ok! And what if he were anything like Bill O’Reilly? Because if he is anything like the white angry men on FOX News then I will violate all of the 10 Commandments right now, grab a gun, shoot myself, assuring myself a place in the sulphur fires of Hell. Ahh, peace at last!

Ok, let’s imagine that God is more like Morgan Freeman’s portrayal in God Almighty, and imagine for a moment that, bam! man is made out of thin air in God’s own image. Right? Wrong! Well, wrong according to the next contradiction, which follows alongside the birds foul up:

“The Lord God formed the man from the dust on the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and the man became a living being.” (Genesis 2:7 NIV)

So, which one is it? Air or dust? Admittedly, I am easily confused but now I am fully flummoxed. We have only travelled a page or two into the Bible and, already, God is contradicting himself. You would think his preamble would be the easy part! Once God has to remember names and locations after receiving all those prayer-mails and knee-mails, it’s bound to get more difficult. At the start of the second chapter, where it is said that God made man before all the plants and trees, we are in led into confusion again..."

- C.J. Werleman

"Lewis adds further to his take, as a Jew, on the Genesis claim for the creation of the earth, in his typical acidic style:

“Jews know that earth was not created in seven days, because as Jews we know what we are good at. And what we are really good at is – bullshit! This is a wonderful story told to the Jewish people in the desert to distract them from the fact that they did not have air-conditioning. I would love to have the faith to believe it took place in seven days BUT I have thoughts and that can really fuck up the faith thing..."

- C.J. Werleman

"Final thoughts on this, where would Noah have kept the woodpeckers and the termites? With all these millions of animals, reptiles and insects on board this boat for months how big was the poo-room? Ha, poop..."

- C.J. Werleman

"the Canaan Desert. The Bible reconciles this in a manner that is arguably the most ridiculous of all.

The Bible has it written that the entire world, post-flood, spoke a single language. The world’s inhabitants gathered together on a flood plain in the land of Shinar, presumably somewhere in what we know to be Israel today. All citizens of the world united to build a new city, with what would be an iconic tower, being so magnificent that its pinnacle would seem to touch the heavens. Working together in solidarity and with a common purpose, the ‘world’ built this impressive tower made of brick and mortar, and indeed, according to Bible lore, it reached into Heaven.

Was God happy with this engineering feat of human endeavour? Was he happy that man had united after the virtual elimination of his species as a result of God’s flood? The answer is no, he wasn’t. In fact, God was furious that man would do such a thing without it being, specifically,..."

- C.J. Werleman

"What’s further interesting about this story is that Abraham lied and deceived a Pharaoh with God’s endorsement. What kind of moral teaching is this? I think all believers should find it somewhat unsettling that the human father of the Judaeo-Christian faith was a blatant liar. The Church of Latter Day Saints, the Mormon faith, was likewise founded by a convicted fraudster in Joseph Smith, but at least the Mormons got magic underwear for following him..."

- C.J. Werleman

"God says to Abraham:

“Every male among you shall be circumcised. You are to undergo circumcision and it will be a sign of the covenant between me and you.” (Genesis 17:10 NIV)

Thus, if you are male and reading this book, chances are you too have no foreskin, which according to some scientific claims contains 75% of the erogenous nerves of the penis. You can point to this passage in the Bible to explain the reason why your uncircumcised friends are experiencing 300% more pleasure during sex. I have to say, however, that I personally bear no grudge against God for this covenant, being circumcised myself, because if I were to enjoy sex any more than I currently do then I would never get anything accomplished. It would be a case of ‘goodbye, outside world..."

- C.J. Werleman

Bible Arguments (Continue) Part 2

By VeNgeR GrEenTag

I am right... and this the truth up to the matter...
Life sucks!

How does God pops out?
The big boss... the big guy?
Who created him?
Amd how few couples create thousand of children...
Do you get it where are you going... you silly goose faggots...

Just fucking nowhere!

It depends which gospel you read..
Slavery...
Cherry Picking the bible it won't help in any way...
Each gospel throws different story?

And here is the best thing...
The best one...
You got son...
His name is Jesus you sacrafice him in the name of mankind sins?
Love?
Are you insane...
This outrageous...
Rape and then marry your victim?
How about go fuck yourself...
Has anybody read the bible or you belief in made up shit?

Most of your today beliefs are based upon no any good grounds... foundation...
This us the truth
The messengers
....
John
Matthew
Marcus
Luke

Those people sound like drunk people...
From the bar...
Nothing is historically...accurate...
You can not have in a courtroom
Four witnesses with four different opionions...
Which contradict each other...
Such thing...
Gets filter up and gets into the Bullshit sector.
Jesus = Historical stand point...
No accurate evidence...
Contradictions... with facts and story... does not apply as accurate...

People belief In God... But Lepricons... Santa Claus and Harry Potter all that are unreal...
If God exist can At Least be some kinda rapist,just asking?

We do know choice to stay in the unknown and in the mystery. Instead we choose the position..
To say there is "God", than "I don't know".

"If the God of the Bible is all-powerful and therefore omnipotent, then his wickedness is second to none. To be omnipotent means that not only did he create evil but he does nothing to prevent it. When small children were being thrown alive into burning furnaces during the Second World War, God did nothing to prevent their agonizing deaths, therefore permitting evil to take its course. Or put another way still, by the time you have completed reading this page, another few hundred children will die of thirst or starvation. Epicurus, the Greek Philosopher, had the common sense to write way back in 300 BC"

- Thats how you deal with babies you throw them in the fire...
Just throw those fuckers!

The best thing you can do... you can definetly stop believing...
BS...
IT HAS A PROBLEM...
FALSE PROBLEM
AND promised a solution...

Under Mormons its written morons
A-Semetrical moron

Back ON!

LAST CHAPTER

Bible Arguments (Extra)

By DeYtH Banger

Oh men when is about bible it ends up into no needing this type of religion…
Or to be more clear not needing bible…
Full of lies
Not proper scornce and countless boring stuff…

BUT THE BIGGEST JOKE IS…
NEW TASTEMENT OS THE NEW JOKE BOOK FULL B.S.
Fun shit until you find its written by some kinda mental fuck up.

“"And the Lord smelled a sweet savor.”
Noah kills the “clean beasts” and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all “clean” animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. “And the Lord smelled a sweet savor.” After this God “said in his heart” that he’d never do it again because “man’s heart is evil from his youth.” So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21"

- Invisible man…
All Almighty All
Knowing
Working with pray
He has limits
And whatsoever the more you dig deep
The more ambigious idiots you start to see and feel…
“Yeah
GOD WORDS
YEAH

GOD ALMIGHTY AND AND ALL KNOWING WHAT A MORON THING”

We got Spirit…
Holy spirit…
Soul
Oh men fuck all of you. Its not about hatred about interogation of bullshit…
I got bullshit filter…

“"Into your hand are they (the animals) delivered.” God gave the animals to humans, and they can do whatever they please with them. This verse has been used by bible believers to justify all kinds of cruelty to animals and environmental destruction. 9:2

“I do set my bow in the cloud.”
God is rightly filled with remorse for having killed his creatures. He makes a deal with the animals, promising never to drown them all again. He even puts the rainbow in the sky so that whenever he sees it, it will remind him of his promise so that he won’t be tempted to do it again. (Every time God sees the rainbow he says to himself: “Oh, yeah…. That’s right. I promised not to drown the animals again. I guess I’ll have to find something else to do.”).
But rainbows are caused by the nature of light, the refractive index of water, and the shape of raindrops. There were rainbows billions of years before humans existed. 9:13"

“"They speedily took down every man his sack to the ground, and opened every man his sack … and the cup was found in Benjamin’s sack. Then they rent their clothes.” 14:12-13

The Jews were God’s chosen people. So why did God have them enslaved for 400 years? 15:13

When it was dark, there appeared from out of nowhere a burning lamp between the pieces of dead animals. 15:17

“And Abram fell on his face.” 17:3

Abraham laughs at God for telling him that he and Sarah will have a child, when they are 100 and 90 years old, respectively.17:17

Abraham"

- Absurdity after absurdity… quran is easy read than a Bible B.S.
God huge communication with mankind old tastement….bible…
But now…
Holy cow
Nothing

God…
God
God…
God
…
God
Lord
Lord
What a moral idiotic story… each day by day I become dumb and dumb… oh men!

Segub
Arub
Jerorich
What the hell??
What the fuck sake???
Where all those fucks out???
From where…
Am I wrong??

Impressum

Tag der Veröffentlichung: 07.08.2020

Widmung:
Atheist Community, Atheist Videos, Debates... Life... Reality!

Nächste Seite

Seite 1 /