Open Season

Hi, there

Below is a poem written in the wake of the recent Sandy Hook school shooting. I have never had to bury my own child, yet, I have witnessed my parents having to bury a child(my sibling), so I know first hand how parents are tormented having to prepare for something that they are not, and never can be, prepared for. It is for this reason that I would not want to take away the only comfort that a parent in this tragedy might have, and in this case, that is to believe that their child has not really died, but lives on in a "hereafter". 

Here is the poem, by author Cameo Smith.....

 Twas' 11 days before Christmas, around 9:38

when 20 beautiful children stormed through heaven's gate.
Their smiles were contagious, their laughter filled the air.
They could hardly believe all the beauty they saw there.

They were filled with such joy, they didn't know what to say.
They remembered nothing of what had happened earlier that day.
"Where are we?" asked a little girl, as quiet as a mouse.
"This is heaven." declared a small boy. "We're spending Christmas at God's house."

When what to their wondering eyes did appear,
But Jesus, their savior, the children gathered near.
He looked at them and smiled, and they smiled just the same.
Then He opened His arms and He called them by name.

And in that moment was joy, that only heaven can bring:
Those children all flew into the arms of their King,
And as they lingered in the warmth of His embrace,
One small girl turned and looked at Jesus' face.

And as if He could read all the questions she had,
He gently whispered to her, "I'll take care of mom and dad."
Then He looked down on earth, the world far below,
He saw all of the hurt, the sorrow, and woe,

Then He closed His eyes and He outstretched His hand,
"Let My power and presence re-enter this land!
May this country be delivered from the hands of fools
I'm taking back my nation. I'm taking back my schools!"

Then He and the children stood up without a sound.
"Come now my children, let me show you around."
Excitement filled the space, some skipped and some ran.
All displaying enthusiasm that only a small child can.

And I heard Him proclaim as He walked out of sight,
"In the midst of this darkness, I AM STILL THE LIGHT."

Notice that the author goes one step further than merely assuring the parents and other believers that the deceased children live on in a land of pure, unadulterated bliss, AKA, "heaven". Yes, he goes further and makes it political, attributing such statements as, "I'm taking back my nation. I'm taking back my schools!", to the god he worships, in this case, the Christian god. The implication, of course, is that we mean atheists/secularists have driven their "God" out of school and out of our nation, yadda, yadda, and this is the reason for tragedies such as Sandy Hook and other mass shootings. This, I contend, is malarkey on many levels.  

Bottom line, when the author tries to combine politics with his religion, his religious beliefs then become open season as far as I'm concerned. Does it suck when certain people's only source of comfort gets caught in the crossfire? Yes, it does, but that's the cost of the religious trying to force their spiritual beliefs into public affairs. You see, if believers can get themselves to actually believe that their deceased children can be happily skipping around and filled with "joy" after having been ripped away from everything they've ever known...e.g..their parents, their siblings, their home, their friends, their toys, their family pets, etc., that's fine by me; they should believe it to their heart's content. However, the minute that they say something so stupid, so insulting, and something so demonstrably false as the reason for these types of shootings is because "God" is missing(or "not welcomed"), all bets are off. Yes, the notion that a belief in "God" precludes "evil", is demonstrably false. A few examples that affirm this would be "Hitler"(Catholic), and the numerous churches where "God" is most certainly invited, and yet, kids are molested right in "His (supposed) House". And what does "God" do? Nothing. 'Coincidence?

 Perhaps it's time we start investigating other ways to find comfort when we lose loved ones, that is, if we can't keep what gives us comfort out of political affairs. 

R.I.P.

Three letters that we all dread typing, but nonetheless, three letters that we will all more than likely type at some point in our lives. But when we desire our loved ones who pass on to "rest in peace", is that what we really mean? Well, it appears not by the looks of what some people say when attempting written eulogies. Mind you, this is not to say that people aren't well-meaning; it's only to say that they might not be thinking things through before they hit the keyboard. A friend and former band mate from back in my jammin'-cover-songs days passed on recently, and on a popular networking site, some of the comments from mutual friends really had me thinking. You see, with musicians, it's evidently really popular to talk about how the deceased is jammin' away with other musicians who preceded them in death. Of course, I mean jammin' away in "heaven". One person even commented, "He has moved on to bigger and better things".

But what is this mentality really saying? Bigger and better things? Really? What... as if what my friend accomplished in his lifetime was small and in need of improvement? The results of my friend's efforts as a musician left so much to be desired that I now have to pretend that he's achieving "bigger and better things"? Really? What if my friend was fully content with his achievements and wanted music to be a closed chapter in his life? Shouldn't he have that option? I think so. In other words, what if he really wanted to rest in peace?

So, I think that what is happening here is that while people might be well-meaning and trying to find comfort in an uncomfortable time, they are projecting their desires and beliefs onto the deceased---as if to say, what you gave us in your lifetime was not enough!!!!... we must have more, more, MORE!  And honestly, reading such comments only compounds the sadness. And I guess now is the ideal time to go on record to say that in the event that I die unexpectedly, I'm done with music. I don't want to keep jammin' in some perpetual "afterlife"; I don't want to see my favorite movie over and over or eat my favorite food day in and day out for all of eternity. I want to "rest".

Moral without God?

Actually, the answer is yes. Now, this is not to say that we human beings always, in every single situation, make the moral decision. Of course we don't. But that fact doesn't make us inherently immoral(aka, inherently "evil") . IOW, the Christian philosophy sets up a false dilemma: It posits that since Adam & Co. ate the forbidden fruit, that this made them, and subsequently the rest of the human race, "inherently evil", a result of what it calls, "Original Sin".

This is fallacious reasoning, and it can be easily demonstrated to be fallacious reasoning by just reversing the situation. IOW, what would have happened had Adam and his accomplice not eaten the fruit? To be consistent, wouldn't we have to say that this would have made them inherently good? I think so. But yet, to say that we are "inherently" one way or the other flies in the face of free will, for if we were incapable of wrong-doing, we'd be the equivalent of robots programmed to never to do wrong. But of course, Christianity would have us believe that we are "inherently evil", and yet, look, we aren't incapable of doing "good". The inconsistency is glaring. But for the time being, let's move on to the supposed moral "standard"---the standard from which we supposedly fall short.

In a few short steps it can be demonstrated that the biblical standard of morality - that is, the morality that we're to be shooting for - is subjective.

If "wrong"(aka "sin") is defined as going against whatever God says, then right away we see that "wrong" is a relative thing, not an absolute thing. If "God" doesn't get his/her/its sense of "right"/"wrong" from an external source, but instead, IS the source, then whatever this God deems "good" at any given moment is completely arbitrary. This, BTW, is very dangerous. Think about it---if nothing prevents this God from waking up one day and deciding that slavery is "good", then from a theist POV, slavery is "good" if God says so. On the other hand, if there is something preventing this God from deciding that slavery is "good", then right away we see that there are values outside of/independent of this God to which he/she/it adheres. And for the record, I used slavery in my example because the bible condones slavery. If the apologetic(defense) is that this is Old Testament/Old Law, etc., and therefore such things are obsolete, then this is yet more compelling evidence that biblical morality is relative to the time, and in which case, it is not "objective", as the bible and Christians claim it is.

"BaNg!"

I would wager that, of all those who know me and follow my posts - both in the blogger world, and on Facebook - many would love to ask me the following question:

"So, Jeff, if you don't believe in hell, then why does it bother you so much when Christians raise the issue in conversation?"

First off, these people would be 100% correct in that I don't believe in "hell"(or "heaven", or gods/devils). True. There is not one iota of objective confirmation for any of it. Notwithstanding, I frequently discuss "hell" under the pretense that it exists, simply to make a few rhetorical points to those who do believe in it. Two of which points are:

1) believing a proposition simply because you're afraid to not believe it, is bankrupt from the get-go; it is not a good reason to believe something.

2) this whole concept that there is a place where people are kept alive and tormented with fire for all of eternity is an immoral concept, just as worshiping any being who implements and condones such a place is immoral.

Re: 1., I wonder if I should also be afraid of "Jahannum"(Islamic "hell")? Moreover, I wonder if Christians are afraid of "Jahannum"? Well, the answer to the latter, of course, is no---Christians are not afraid of Islamic hell. Why? because they don't believe in it, just as I do not believe in it. Would it be wise for those of us who don't believe in "Jahannum" to believe in it, just in case? The answer, again, is no......'no more wise than to sleep with the light on just in case the Boogieman is in your closet.

The point being, if you want me to worry about going to "hell", then you should know that all of your work is ahead of you, simply because you would first have to proffer some evidence that, a) our "personalities"(the closest natural explanation of "soul" I can come up with) can exist independently of our brains(the scientific evidence says otherwise, BTW), and b) that Christianity and its "heaven and hell"(AKA carrot and stick) are real(again, to date, there is no objective confirmation for any of it)

As for the thinly-veiled threats that Christians make..a la... "I'm just concerned for your soul!". It would seem that I shouldn't be offended if I don't believe in "hell", right? Bzzzzzt....Wrong. I'm offended by threats of "hell" in the exact same way I would be offended if your child walked up to me with his or her plastic gun, put the barrel to my temple, pulled the trigger, and said "BANG!".

In other words....

Yes, we know that plastic guns aren't real; we know that real bullets don't come out of pretend guns. But that is besides the point, isn't it? Yes, it is. We know that it's just plain rude and insulting when/if children do this sort of thing. Well, when Christians threaten me with "hell" - which, to me is likewise "pretend" until/unless they can prove that it is a real, literal place - it is no different....well, except that it is possibly even worse, since they are adults.

Decisions, decisions...

Most if not all Christians fall into one of two groups:

1) those who have read their bibles vertically, from cover to cover.

2) those who have not read their bibles vertically, from cover to cover.

For the time being, I'm going to talk about the former group.

Okay, for those who have read their bibles as delineated in 1, I contend that one of two things will invariably happen when these people encounter scripture that creates cognitive dissonance..i.e..ideas that don't make sense; ideas that raise an eyebrow.

Since many Christians like to extol Jesus, and while at the same time, they attempt to "divorce" or distance him and their relationship with him from "religion", let's go ahead and look directly at some of Jesus' own advice, advice that we should all be able to agree is crappy advice if anyone else were to give it:

- Do not plan for the future:

³⁴ Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

(Matthew 6:34)

- Do not save money:

¹⁹ Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal.

(Matthew 6:19-20)

- Sell everything and give it to the poor:

³³ Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.

(Luke 12:33)

- Don't work to obtain food:

²⁷ Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.

(John 6:27)

- If someone hits you, invite them to do it again.

³⁹ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

(Matthew 5:39)

So, again, I would wager that we would all agree that this is some pretty horrible advice. But yet, people who remain in group 1, above, will look for ways to defend the above-quoted verses.

This brings me to my point from above:

When people from group 1 encounter these verses(and more verses like them), one of two things will take place. Either, a) they will be forced to look for ways to defend/reconcile these verses, aka, employ apologetics, or b) they will deconvert from Christianity. IOW, these people will be faced with a decision.

*It should be noted at this point that there could be Christians from group 2 reading this right now who didn't know that the bible contained such passages(I contend that there are Christians out there who have not seen such verses). In this case, these people are perfectly within reason should they rethink and change their minds about Christianity. IOW, should they come to an understanding with themselves that they can no longer honestly sustain their belief that Christianity is true, and/or, something that they need, they are being reasonable to discard/dismiss it. We can throw the proverbial "baby" out, right along with the dirty bath water.

You're being so negative!

::sigh::

I get this charge a lot, both in general..e.g....as theists accuse atheists of being "negative" in general, and also, sometimes in my personal life. Now, if anyone wants to attempt to convince me how making a conscious effort to confront reality head-on at all costs is being "negative", we can start there, but in all seriousness, you've got your work cut out for you. I say right up front that I don't like false hope. Nope, 'no likey. Why? Simple---because it's false. Shit happens, and why shouldn't it happen? There is not one scrap of evidence that demons and devils cause shit to happen. When shit happens, wish-thinking isn't going to change the fact, and many times, wish-thinking can even cause more shit later on.

For those who believe that a god does all the good stuff and a devil causes all the shit, you are perfectly free to believe that, but here's a few things to consider: 1) blaming an invisible bad guy when shit happens takes focus off any viable solution to the problem, while conveniently deflecting responsibility in cases where  people actually cause shit to happen. 2) a world in which there is a devil and god causin' shit and fixin' shit, respectively, is totally indistinguishable from a world in which we sometimes get lucky, and other times, we get unlucky...aka "shit happens".

Now, how, pray-tell, is it being "negative" to accept and live in the simpler, much-more-likely "world"? One saves so much time and avoids so much potential aggravation by dealing with what's in front of them. If common sense - in conjunction with things like logic and reason - tell you that something ain't right, then we owe it to ourselves to accept and confront that "something". Seriously, if we cannot trust our own ability to reason, then we've essentially got nothing. To do the polar opposite of using common sense - that is, to look for ways to reconcile utter nonsense - is to do ourselves a disservice. But yet, trusting our reasoning abilities makes us "negative" and "pessimists" according to some. Sad, but true.

I'd like to conclude with the following analogy:

If an alcoholic overcame their drinking dependency and he or she started a blog - say, a blog both to raise awareness to the disease and also as a form of self-therapy - who on earth would have the cajones to call him or her "negative"? How is this analogous to anything, you might ask?  Here's how: I have stopped be dependent on religion, namely, my inherited, Christian beliefs. I am now free to actually use my brain to its fullest potential.(negative?). I no longer believe that someone is watching me 24/7, listening in on my every flippin' thought.(negative?) I try to be good for goodness sake, despite that I am not perfect at this and have made many mistakes.(negative?) I have spoken very frankly about things on this blog(and at times, on Facebook) because I know that there people out there just like me who have honest doubts about what they were taught to believe, but yet, they are too afraid to question it, simply because they are taught to not question it.  Well, I feel that I am giving these people real hope, where their "faith" and/or their church might be giving them false hope, which is the equivalent of none at all. 

Represent.

As some of you know, I am co-founder/co-song writer and bass player for a progressive heavy metal band. Well, it's been brought to my attention that a few people with whom I work closely are concerned that my being atheist will be a turn-off to any existing or potential fans of our music, since our former singer(now deceased) was heavily into mysticism/spiritualism, which, as you might imagine, became the inspiration of a good deal of our songs. Well, I can respect that concern, because, after all, music is a business as well as an art-form. However, my simple response is that it really shouldn't matter, and that their concern is a bit irrational. Let me attempt a rhetorical point by asking this simple question: would people stop buying Stephen King's books or watching his movies if they found out that he doesn't really believe in zombie-cats? I don't think so.

 There is fiction, and there is non-fiction. There is reality; there is fantasy. Subject matter that is fiction/fantasy doesn't become less intriguing or less entertaining if the author doesn't actually believe in that which he writes. While there was a time when I believed in a god, angels, a hereafter, etc., I have since changed my mind. Notwithstanding, I think writing about such things makes for interesting subject matter. And then on the other hand, the truth really does seem to be stranger than fiction a lot of the time.

Prayer

This is the ritual of taking a moment of silence to ask god to do stuff for you---from giving you a really great parking space, to healing your loved ones, to getting a promotion at work. Or, in some cases, it's simply asking god to do "His Will". And BTW, now's a good time to interject that I used to do all of the above. But, the truth is, there is not one scrap of conclusive evidence that "prayer" actually does anything(aside from acting as a placebo). Prayer is, IMO, redundant at best; a complete waste of time, at worst.

Take, for instance, the god to whom Christians pray(and to whom I once prayed). An omniscient god, by definition, possesses all knowledge, including the past, present, and future. If god knows the future, as Christianity and its Christians proclaim, then this god knows, with absolute certainty, the outcome of the future set of events. If this god knows the outcome of the future set of events, then logic says that the future is fixed; the future is carved in stone, so-to-speak. Thus, this god knows what your needs, desires, and preferences are before you "pray". This is problematic for another reason, too, and that is that this god is not a free agent if he is omniscient. For example, an intercessory prayer for the purpose of healing a loved one is a pointless endeavor, simply because god already knows if your loved one will live or die, and more importantly, he cannot change this outcome. For god to be able change the outcome of any future event would mean that this god never knew the future to begin with.

Then there's the quagmire of why the god to whom believers pray answers some prayers with a "yes", but others with a "no". If you view this from outside the believer's bubble, you'll see that it's simply a case of bad luck versus good luck. Curiously, the aforementioned yes/no "answers" yield the same results we'd expect to see in an uncaring, impersonal world with no guidance, whatsoever..i.e...sometimes we get lucky and get a great parking space; sometimes we don't. Sometimes our ill loved ones recover; sometimes they don't.

Another question that surfaces if one digs a little bit deeper, is why the god to whom believers pray will (presumably) suspend the laws of nature, say, for someone's grandmother to recover from her bunion surgery, but yet, will let untold millions starve to death, including children. Again, what is going on here? What's wrong with this picture? The simplest and most likely explanation is this: No one is suspending any natural laws, whatsoever. Children die of hunger for the pure and simple reason of the location they're born. Someone's grandmother has a successful bunion surgery for the pure and simple reason that she may have been born and raised in a civilized and developed country, which lends itself to having good medical care.

In conclusion, the only meaningful prayer that can be uttered is to ask god to do his "Will". But even that is totally redundant since his "Will" was established from the on-set and cannot be changed. Thus, when people say, "God has a plan", they really, really mean it! This is not to say that most people's prayers aren't well-meaning; in a lot of cases, they are. But the down-side is that it can give a sense of false hope.

Atheism vs Agnosticism

I won't lie. It is my encounters with believers, namely, Christians, that supply me with much if not most of my blog material. A recent encounter prompts me to talk about Atheism and Agnosticism, simply because one believer has insisted that I must choose between the two. IOW, he understands the two to be mutually exclusive. In a word, false. Atheism deals with belief(in this case, lack of belief); Agnosticism deals with  knowledge(in this case, what cannot be known).

I'll start with the latter:  If we are talking a "God" that is unknowable, incomprehensible, immaterial, invisible, etc., then I do not, and by definition, cannot, know if such an entity exists. However, that doesn't preclude me from believing or disbelieving that such an entity exists. To break it down----I do not know if such a being exists(Agnostic), but I don't believe that one such being does exist(Atheism). Thus, I am an Agnostic Atheist. This should be very easy to understand.

All that said, the type of "God" that Christians worship is NOT the above-mentioned type of god. No. The god that Christians worship has specific attributes, and according to Christians, "He" is most certainly knowable(since they claim to have a personal relationship with said being) ,and what's more, this being lives inside their hearts, guiding them daily in their personal affairs. Putting aside the fact that if this is true, then this "God" is clearly give people conflicting advice, I nevertheless know that this "God" not only does not exist, but cannot exist. How do I know this, and how can we know this?? Simple---because the characteristics assigned to it by believers and their bibles are mutually exclusive in some cases. For example, the concept of "infinitely just" contradicts the concept of "infinitely merciful". And there's "omniscience" contradicting "omnipotence". It is for these reasons and more that I can say that no such being exists, and I can say it with as much certainty as I can say that a "square circle" doesn't exist.

Spirituality: A License to Protest(aka whine)?

An acquaintance I met through a popular networking site who happens to be the former g/f of a late friend - and incidentally, this late friend was someone I was very close to myself, partially because of our past of playing in a band together - has made it clear on several occasions that she doesn't like the fact that I challenge people's religious beliefs....or, in her case, her "spiritual" beliefs.(yes, she's one of those who thinks that she can divorce her "God" from religion).

In any case, she continually goes on and on about how we're a "free country", yadda, yadda, and that we're free to believe whatever we wish. It should be noted that I have never once disagreed that we're free to believe whatever we wish. In fact, I say it quite frequently in these types of discussions.

So, here's the rub, because as you might've guessed, it's coming:

While we are, yes, free to believe whatever-the-hell we wish, the fact is, in some cases, people's personal beliefs become collective beliefs, and if/when people's collective beliefs turn into actions, those actions have consequences. For example, when the collective beliefs of a certain group of people turn to trying to teach "creationism" in the science/biology classroom, a consequence of this is going to be getting a challenge from people who know that "creationism"(or if you prefer the dressed-up euphemism, "Intelligent Design") is NOT "science". Now, if you are reading this right now and you are a proponent of creation/ID, *feel free to provide a physical street address of where scientists(key) are currently conducting tests on special "creation".

(*Note, you won't be able to provide any such address, but you can try. You won't be able to, because special "creation" by invisible, conscious, creator-beings, is NOT "science")

You see, in order for "creation" by magic, or ESP - or however "God" supposedly does it - to become a scientific theory, we must be able to do things like study it, observe it, test/falsify it, and make predictions on it. Well, we can't do any of the above. Thus, "creation" doesn't qualify fact or theory.

This, of course, is dealing with all of what exists. Then there's the subject of us homosapiens and where we came from.

D****** writes....

"did you see [so 'n' so's] baby???..where's the evidence to believe such a beautiful creature so unlike an ape evolved from a primate/single cell amoeba???"

She concludes that a baby human is nothing like a newborn ape, does she? She's obviously never seen an infant ape.

In any case, anti-evolutionists like to spend all of their time being critical of evolution, despite the undeniable fact that, at a minimum, we can directly observe new baby humans evolving directly from other mature humans. Yes, we can SEE it. The stork doesn't bring babies; babies aren't spontaneously being "created" out of thin air. No, the evidence shows us that life evolves from other life. So, taking this into consideration - in conjunction with the fact that bashing evolution is one big non-sequitir - the anti-evolutionists have all of their work cut out for them when it comes to proving their "lookist", creationist beliefs---beliefs that we can rightfully challenge. In fact, it's our duty to challenge them if we don't want our kids indoctrinated(brainwashed) with nonsense.

The irony. It STINGS

Aside from being extremely ticked off, what would your opinion be of the guy who, while you're pulled over in the middle of the desert reading a map, or texting(or whatever), flattens your tires, and then proceeds to stick his head in your window and says "Hey?.....'need a lift?"

Would you not think this person is bat-sh*t crazy? If you consider yourself a normal, sane person, then you know damned-well that your opinion of him would not be a good one. Welp, I've got news for you if you are a Christian: you are dealing with the same exact type of lunacy if you accept the cornerstone tenet known as "Salvation". That's right, God will "save" you from the very problem that he created..i.e.."evil".

First, let's look at the obvious:

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" ~ Isaiah 45:7

Now let's look at the case of when one of God's angels rebelled against God:

Okay, so, an angel gets a wild hair(or maybe a feather?) up his butt, and not only did God NOT destroy this defiant angel on the spot, knowing that said angel would be a blight on humanity, but he gave him his own flippin' resort. He even gave him a really cool name..i.e. "Lucifer"(why not, "Dick"?). Oh, and he left him in charge of the whole resort and its occupants. Oh, wait, there's more ....and God made it really, really hot, just the way a DEVIL likes it! Oooo, ouch! Yeah, nice going, "GOD"! Sheesh! lol

Now let's look at something a little more subtle:

Christianity would have you believe that this Lucifer fellow is influencing people to commit their own "evil" acts in his name. Yes, that's right. For instance, as you read this, a child is being raped and/or beaten, and where is "God"? Well, lo and behold, he's standing there with arms folded watching it all go down(assuming he actually exists, of course). And why is he standing there being useless? Why, because he cannot tamper with the perp's "free will", as the standard apologetic goes. Yes, that's right, according to Christian apologists, preserving this slimy bastard's "free will" is evidently more important than the well-being of the child(victim).

Now, if you consider yourself a faithful, bible-believing Christian, then you leave me no choice but to believe that you more or less buy into the above chunk of illogical nonsense. If you are a cultural or moderate Christian, then, well, you implicitly buy into it, that is, unless you don't believe that "God" is things like all-loving and all-powerful. Like I always say, if you'd like to be the first person to offer an angle that you feel I haven't considered, you are welcome to chime in. By no means do I want to do the same thing that irks me to no end when believers do it, which is, to sit here and defend my errors.

Dear Believer,

Give me a good reason why "God" must allow Lucifer and his "evil" to exist, and I may just change my mind. In the mean time, I will work on a scenario for a future post that would allow for "evil"(if it MUST exist), allows criminals their "free will", and the best part...... no one suffers......EVER. 'Sound impossible? It's not.

Gusher

A week ago-yesterday, I wacked my index finger on my left hand cutting some chateau with 10 inch Wusthof. This one was a gusher, but fortunately, the cut was more diagonal to my finger(a flap of skin), as opposed to perpendicular. Four hours and five stitches later, I was out the ER door. A few days later I picked up my bass to see if I could play, but it was out of the question. Notwithstanding, I sat there and played making a conscious effort to NOT use my index. This, of course, left me limited to what I could play, but I was playing, nonetheless. Where am I going with this?

Here: After only one week of making a conscious effort to not fret any strings with my index finger, I have to now make a conscious effort to re-incorporate my index back into my game. One part of my mind is telling me, "Hey, dude...you can use your index finger here and there now, it's almost completely healed"...and another part of my brain is telling me, "Don't use that cut finger, dude!". I find it really weird that a lifetime of using all fingers can be "undone" with only a week of training myself to NOT use my index.

Moral of story, unless you LOSE a finger, do NOT attempt to relearn to play during the healing process. You will screw yourself. Arrrg.

Creationism: 101

"GOD DID IT!.......


.....class dismissed!"

Ad Hominem: The best they've got?

Ad hominem:

1. appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

ref: Dictionary.com

Example of a Christian using ad homimem in a follow-up comment after blocking me:

"[...], he's gone. I blocked him. He is a contrarian for the sake of contrary and an argumentarian simply to argue. It doesn't matter what you say, he skips over what makes sense and attacks from the flank. I've had to put up with people like this for years. They have nothing of value to add. They say they are atheists, but they spend all their time fighting the God they don't believe in. The proverb is true with people like him - Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him. I've given him far more slack than I should have. I don't need to go to bed fretting over a person who has nothing of value to add."

Notice that the Christian, in this case, a "Pastor", refuses to even acknowledge that he's in a conversation with an Atheist. To him, I am, uh, "fighting God". He then goes on to tell one of his flock that I'm a "fool"(because, of course, the bible says so in a "proverb"), and that Christians shouldn't even listen to Atheists, or else, that makes them "fools", too. 'Funny how that works, isn't it?

 Then there's the accusation that I'm posting things contrary to what he believes for the pure sake of being contrary and argumentative. LMAO! Good grief! Yes, I put all the time and energy into my responses simply because I want to disagree. It couldn't possibly be because I really disagree and even have good reasons to back it. Nah.

God's Chamber of Horrors

aka, "Hell".

Recently I was treated to the ever-so-common, practically-inevitable-when-dealing-with-Christians, threat of "hell". Sometimes the threat is thinly-veiled; other times, it's more blatant. Sadly, this was a case of the latter.

Christian acquaintance(female), said....

"Just deeply concerned for your soul, my understanding is that hell is not a nice place, my heart would break for you if you ended up there [...]. I will continue to pray and love you."

Let's see, where to begin...

Okay, firstly, if you feel that I don't deserve to go to "Hell", then why-the-f' do you implicitly support such a place by loving and worshiping the very being who could do away with it if he wanted to, but doesn't? Well?

If, on the other hand, you feel that I DO deserve to be tormented 24/7 for all of eternity, then what's the problem? I'm getting precisely what I deserve, right? That's good ol' "justice", bible-style, isn't it? Please, any Christian, be the first to put it into terms that make sense.

Secondly, if "sin must be punished!" as the fundamentalists will insist, then fine, punish the one or two people who committed the one-time "offense" of eating the piece of forbidden flippin' fruit. Don't blame people who weren't there and had no part of that decision. I mean, isn't that the whole point of "free will"?..i.e..for each person to choose for themselves? Yes, I believe so. Yet, mysteriously, Adam & Eve chose "evil" on our behalf, and for some strange reason, believers buy this, hook, line, and sinker.

Thirdly, what in tarnation is a "soul", and if it's something non-physical - IOW, something beyond the scope of sensory perception - then feel free to explain how you punish torture such a (non)-thing. 'Listening.


And finally, what does "God" hope to accomplish after the fact? IOW, assuming that some people will wake up in "Hell"....so-the-hell-what??? What does it actually prove or accomplish? If it's all true, it still remains something that cannot be proven until after the fact(after death). In which case, it seems to me that this is merely God's way of saying, "See?....told ya!.....neener, neener!". You know, that "playground" mentality we all remember from elementary school.

*Note, just like there is no literal "Heaven", there is no literal "Hell". Again, I have merely discussed this topic under the pretense that "Hell" exists, in an attempt to show the absurdity of the notion.

Disclaimer and clarification

Herein are some common assumptions made by the Christians I encounter. I'll deal with these right from the onset to avoid these assumptions being used as actual arguments. In other words, please don't waste my  time, or yours, with these retorts:

In no particular order.....

Christian:  "You just hate God!!!!"

Me: No, I most certainly do not "hate God". I no more "hate God" than I "hate" the gremlin who hides my car keys under the couch cushions(and once in the trash).  I don't believe that gods or gremlins exist, but since I must share the planet with people who insist that the former exists, I sometimes talk about "God" under the pretense that he/she/it exists to make a rhetorical point. It's not exactly unheard of.

Christian: "You just want to sin!!!"

Me: No. I just want to search for truth no matter where it leads, and so far, there is no extra-biblical evidence for "sin". And besides, if "sin" is defined as a transgression against God's laws, then "sin" is a relative thing; not an absolute thing. For example, if there is nothing that prevents God from creating a new law that states, "If you don't behead your third-born child, that is a sin!", then intelligent, sane people see the immediate problem with that. On the other hand, if something does prevent God from implementing such a law, then obviously there is an external standard of "right"/"wrong" that even this God conforms to.

Christian: "You just want to be God!!!"

Me: 'Heard this "gem" just the other day. Nope, sorry, Charlie, I have zero desire to drown the people who disappoint me, nor do I have a desire to have someone tacked to a cross before I can forgive someone else. I have zero desire to send plagues, smite people, or dash children's heads against rocks. But if one finds those aspirations noble?... aspire away. Best of luck with that.

Christian: "You think Christians are stupid!!!"

Me:  No, I don't think Christians are stupid, but I do think that they compartmentalize their beliefs, just as I once did. At least Atheists disbelieve across-the-board..i.e..they're consistent. Whereas, while Christians disbelieve in the myriad supernatural claims of other religions, they reserve a part of their brain to allow Christianty's outrageous claims. This part of their brain is "taped-off" to reason. Christians certainly don't believe that Allah dictated his will and testament to Muhammad as he sat in a cave and then later flew off into the clouds on winged pony. No, hell, no, that is nonsense to them. Yet, Christians don't flinch at the thought of a man dying, and then three days later, getting up and walking out of his grave. Virgin birth? Sure!...it's in the bible, isn't it? This is what we're dealing with.

Christian: "You're so angry!!!"

Me: Yes, angry at myself - not you - for allowing myself to be duped, when I knew all along that there was something amiss. In this case, anger is very a cleansing and even necessary emotion.

Christian: "You think we came from slime!!!!"

Me: And you think we came from DUST! Is that really less absurd? Now, with that point made and out of the way, Atheists don't believe that we "came from slime". That is a classic strawman argument.

Note*, I will likely be adding to this list as time goes on.

Thx for reading.